Journal of Thermal Stresses

ISSN: 0149-5739 (Print) 1521-074X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uths20

Effects of thermal load on wheelrail contacts: A

review

Jay Prakash Srivastava, Prabir Kumar Sarkar & Vinayak Ranjan

To cite this article: Jay Prakash Srivastava, Prabir Kumar Sarkar & Vinayak Ranjan (2016):
Effects of thermal load on wheelrail contacts: A review, Journal of Thermal Stresses, DOI:
10.1080/01495739.2016.1216060

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01495739.2016.1216060

Published online: 30 Aug 2016.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 297

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uths20

Download by: [Indian School of Mines] Date: 21 September 2016, At: 03:43
JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01495739.2016.1216060

Effects of thermal load on wheelrail contacts: A review

Jay Prakash Srivastava, Prabir Kumar Sarkar, and Vinayak Ranjan
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad, India

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This article presents a technical review on the effects of thermal loads evolved Received 19 March 2016
at the wheelrailbrake contact interfaces. These dynamic contact interfaces Accepted 15 June 2016
develop heat transfer conditions of widely varied thermal level. Their modeling KEYWORDS
to identify the sources for a variety of defect formation, observable on wheel Contact temperature;
tread or rail surface, is very important. The railway system, in general, has corrugation; heat partition;
to bear axle load, friction load, and thermal load arising from their contact hot spots; railwheel;
conditions in addition to traction and dynamic loads. The defects arising from shelling; spalling; thermal
the interaction of thermal load and other loadings may be identified as hot fatigue; thermomechanical
spots, shelling, spalling, rolling contact fatigue (RCF), and corrugation. The crack
mechanisms for the formation of such defects are pivoted over the existing
thermal environment of dynamic interacting surfaces. This review summarizes
the works of early investigations and recent advances in modeling the heat
transfer conditions required to estimate the temperature distribution at the
contact zone. The heat partitioning method for both drag and stop braking
conditions, in the presence of rail chill effect, is emphasized. Thermal gradient,
introduced by localized temperature rise in the contact zone, in the presence of
variable friction coefficient, promotes the RCF process. These alter the residual
stresses in the contact region to cause a structural shakedown, aggravate
plastic flow and activates ratchetting phenomenon in rails. The evolution of
thermomechanical surface and subsurface fatigue cracks are also discussed for
the completeness of this article. The effect of all such defect formation, emerg-
ing from thermal loading condition, and their countermeasures for defect
mitigation are presented in this review. This abridged technical documentation
envisions attracting more research in the area to improve wheelrail set design
and performance standards to extend enhanced safety and comfort to rail
transport operation. It is opined that the thermomechanical loading, their
effects on promoting defect formation and propagation should be studied in
combination instead of the current practice of treating them separately.

Introduction
The railway wheels, in general, are to (i) support the axle load, (ii) help steer the cars, and (iii) serve
as braking drums [1]. There are two sources of thermal load in railway system, one from sliding of the
wheel on rail and the other is from braking process. Both introduce temperature rise at the contact
zone imparted by sliding friction. This in turn gives rise to nonuniform heating of the dynamic contact
elements. In effect, it modifies the structural contact stress distribution and results in residual stresses at
discrete locations of wheel and rail surface areas. Two commonly used braking methods are stop braking
and drag braking [2]. Stop braking acts on trains with scheduled stops or in case of emergency. Drag
braking, on the other hand, controls the speed over relatively longer distances. In either of the cases,
localized heating of the wheel and rail becomes the common result. This condition has strong ability to
initiate cracks and crack growth leading to catastrophe [2].

CONTACT Prabir Kumar Sarkar sarkarpk1955@yahoo.co.in Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian School of Mines,
Dhanbad 826004, India.
2016 Taylor & Francis
2 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

Established rail transport operation experience indicates that the thermal load from braking induces
a variety of defects in the presence of rolling contact loading. This harms both safety of operation
and riding comfort. Together, they influence the fatigue life of wheels and produce defects of different
patterns on both the wheel and rail. An understanding of the consequences of thermal load distribution
at the railwheelbrake interfaces remains an area of common interest for designer, manufacturer, and
its operators. A large number of studies [3, 4] consider the influence of thermal load and mechanical
load on the evolution of stress and defects in isolation. This review intends to bring these phenomena
together to express the effect of localized temperature rise on defect evolution in either of the rail or the
wheel. The formation and growth of cracks in rail and wheel along with other forms of defects observable
on contacting bodies are studied [2, 59].
Several coupled physical phenomena and loading patterns work simultaneously at the wheelrail
contact zone [10]. The loading systems involve mechanical loads [11] like dynamic [1219], impulsive
[20, 21], and frictional loads [2226], in addition to thermal load imparted by braking [2731]. The
operating condition helps heat transfer through conduction, convection, and radiation [3237]. The
localized impulsive temperature, arising from contact friction, promotes material degradation [3843]
like plastic deformation due to thermal softening and metallurgical transformation. Most researchers
consider conduction to be the dominating heat transfer mode. It is imperative to mention here that
the simultaneous action of all the stated loading conditions only complicates the safety of operation by
evolution of various failure modes [3, 44]. The defects emanating from the thermal gradient at rail
wheelbrake contacts are given due emphasis in this article.
During initial loading cycles, as the contact stress exceeds the yield strength limit, the wheelrail
interface material experiences plastic deformation [45]. This causes evolution of tensile residual stresses
by unloading of the prior contacting materials. For strain hardening materials, this effect enables it to
support higher loads than its initial elastic limit. This phenomenon is termed as shakedown condition
[46, 47]. Friction and plastic deformation increase the temperature in the wheelrail contact zone [43].
During braking, the frictional heat at the contact promotes the formation of hot spot (a surface patch
below the brake pad on wheel in contact). Their rapid cooling by sudden contact with cold railhead
aids localized phase transformation to martensite from initial pearlitic steel. This introduces a material
volume expansion of a thin surface layer of brittle character. This transformed patch possesses different
thermomechanical deformation behavior than the base metal of the wheel and the rail.
Swaay [48] and Fec and Sehitoglu [49] indicated the nominal tread surface temperature to reach
300400 C during normal running condition. While upon brake application on a high-speed wheel, the
contact surface temperature can rise to a level of 9001100 C, highly sufficient to promote austenite
phase transformation. Under random variation of temperature and surface rubbing, the martensite
boundary promotes the formation of surface cracks. Hot spots are treated to be the primary contributor
to thermal fatigue damage in the wheel. A fairly moderate thermal loading instills additional stressing of
wheelrail combination and promotes the rolling contact fatigue (RCF) crack formation. While thermal
cracks initiate radially, RCF cracks are inclined due to their mixed-mode loading condition. These cracks
advance by thermal and rolling contact loads. When the transformed martensite material was separated
by surface crack propagation, it is called spalling. Shelling, on the other hand, is caused by subsurface
RCF crack propagation according to Stone and Moyar [50].
The martensitic transformation involves volume expansion process that develops protruded surface
sites. Subsequent braking and rolling of such uneven material produce roughness by noneven wear
mechanisms on the tread of wheel and surface of rail. Such roughness, observed by Vernersson [51], is
termed as corrugation or waviness. Vernersson [52] also indicated its deleterious effects on passengers
safety and comfort, due to consequent vibration, noise, and fatigue.
To prevent occurrence of the stated defects, all being caused by random thermomechanical loads, one
requires to look into the mechanism of heat transfer for temperature rise and its decay during running
and stopping events. Detailed discussion of these mechanisms can be seen in [11, 5358]. The present
article attempts to summarize the existing methods of the evolution of thermomechanical fatigue-
induced defects in bodies under rollingsliding contact states. From a wide range of available literatures,
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 3

Figure 1. Block diagram representation of various railwheelbrake interaction loads to yield observed defects.

only the intriguing publications are included in this review. Estimation of temperature rise based on
different heat flux models is presented. The heat transfer models use heat-partitioning techniques to
determine the temperature field in the contact zone. Because of the dynamic nature of the contacting
surfaces, the locally developed thermal field produces thermal fatigue load in contacting materials. These
contribute to thermal crack initiation and propagation by subsequent rolling pass.
In this summarized technical document, a systematic development of thermomechanical study is
given to signify the variety of defects emanating from contact zone heat transfer conditions. This
review clarifies the understanding of the technologies involved and enlists the preventive measures to be
adopted to meet the demand of increasing speed and higher axle loads. A block diagram representation
enunciating the means of formation of defects, viewed under the problem domain, is given in Figure 1
to reveal the interactive subjects.

Defects arising from thermal gradient

In railwheel system, thermal gradient arises due to microslip and sliding friction at contact surfaces.
The phenomenon of apparent slip, now called microslip, creep, or creepage, was first pointed out
by Osborne Reynolds [59] in 1876 on the basis of physical reasoning and experimental observations.
Later, it is further clarified by researchers [6062] to consider the apparent slip as equal to the difference
between the tangential strains of the bodies in adhesion area. This develops heat by friction due to
unequal velocities of the contacting surface materials during normal rolling condition. Its quantification
in terms of temperature rise, at high forward speeds of about 50 m/s, is pointed out to exceed 100 C as
the adhesion coefficient tends to 0.2 [61]. Predicted temperature rise at the contact zone is found to be
only a few degrees for a traction-less wheel, 200 C for powered wheel with 2% creep [63] and 900 C for
9% creep condition [62].
Garnham and Davis [64] and Song et al. [65] specified creepages or microslips to cause plastic flow
of material. This plastic flow aligns the microstructure and increases the contact surface temperature.
Although the temperature rise by creepages introduces a fairly moderate thermal loading, it may cause
additional stressing of railwheel material. This promotes subsequent RCF crack formation [6668].
Those authors also identified shallow cracking of the wheel tread from such condition.
The rollingslidingbraking conditions generate heat contributed by friction. This induces steep
thermal loads capable to alter the contact stress distribution that also responsible for evolution of
contact surface defects. Thermomechanical stress analysis under different braking conditions is applied
by several authors [6975] to estimate the heat flow effect on wheelrail material using numerical and
experimental methods. Extreme thermal loading may lead to catastrophic failures of rail and/or wheel
emanating from the defects like hot spot, shelling, or spalling. This also can result in a high rate of plastic
strain of the rail surface producing roughness. The damage patterns caused by similar thermomechanical
4 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

loading describe the failure mechanisms involved. The defects that can develop in rails and wheels arise
from a wide range of reasons. The thermal load-induced defects are detailed in the following.

Hot spots
Braking is a high-energy dissipation process. This forms localized spots within the contact patch by
rubbing of partnering surfaces that impart high stress and severe thermal gradient. Fec and Sehitoglu
[49] specified such contact surface area to be of 2040 mm in diameter and designated this phenomenon
called hot spots. Kasem et al. [76] measured the thermal levels to cause hot spots for organic
matrix composite brake pad facing a steel disk with friction contact variations. They observed severe
damage beneath the hot spots, particularly in the form of plastic deformation and microcracks oriented
perpendicularly and parallel to the rubbing surface.
In any sliding system, frictional heat is generated in proportion to local pressure, sliding velocity,
and prevailing coefficient of friction. For a given coefficient of friction at a dynamic wheel-rail contact
interface, there is always a certain sliding velocity exceeding that magnitude the system becomes
unstable. This produces contact load active in a small region of contact patch to result in an elevated
spot temperature. This phenomenon is known as frictionally excited thermoelastic instability (FETEI).
It describes the mechanism of hot spot formation during frictional sliding contact [44, 77, 78]. The
tendency of hot spot formation depends on material parameters of the contact pair. This tendency
increases with high stiffness of partnering materials, low conductivity, and high coefficient of thermal
expansion of brake block material [79].
Numerical [2, 69, 79, 80] and experimental [49, 76, 81] studies on the hot spot phenomenon reveal
that continuous variations in thermomechanical loading in the presence of constraint imposed by
relatively colder surrounding material results in fatigue cracking. Intensity and frequency of braking
force promote crack growth in the regions of hot spots. These finally generate waviness on the contacting
surfaces that induces vibration of the system and generates rolling noise [51, 82].

Shelling and spalling

All railway networks worldwide encounter in general shelling and spalling defects. These limit the
service life of wheel and rail as well. Separation of second-phase material pieces from wheel tread and
rail surface is described as shelling and spalling [83, 84]. Shelling results from subsurface fatigue crack
propagation, while spalling occurs due to surface fatigue crack extension. Fundamentally, such defects
arise from a thermal contact fatigue phenomenon associated with high contact stress caused by tread
braking on wheel surface or by sliding condition at the wheelrail interface in disk braking [10, 36, 85].
Insufficient adhesion at the contact interface during braking is the primary cause of wheel sliding
[8688]. Adhesion is also influenced by the surface contaminants like oil, water, leaves, and dust particles
on rails [89]. A review on the effects of adhesion and creep in producing tread checks and subsequent
shell formation is detailed by Muller [90]. Based on the theoretical shakedown analysis, introduced by
Johnson [91], Kalousek et al. [92] identified the contact fatigue wheel shelling to occur by the combined
effect of high contact stress, high traction force, and low wheel hardness. The effect of braking heat on
shelling is analyzed by Stone et al. [93] and Cummings [94]. The evolution of wheel shelling and its
maintenance system is well described by Stone [95]. According to Steele [96], shells originate in the
vicinity of the demarcation layer between the plastically deformed and nonplastically deformed metal.
The shell cracks grow at an approximate of 45 angle to the tread surface. Much detail can be found in
[97100] describing the rate of crack growth during shell formation. Several researchers also connect
shelling with the presence of a cluster of nonmetallic oxide inclusions [96, 101].
Spalling is the most prevalent defect accounting for approximately 70% of all shell/spall defects.
Usually, these defects do not progress deep below the surface of the rail. The presence of shelling and
spalling both are unfavorable to vehicles dynamic stability, safety, ride comfort, vibration, noise, and safe
life of track/train system [84, 102].
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 5

Figure 2. Schematic representation of corrugated rail surface.

Thermally induced roughness (corrugation, waviness)

Vernersson [51] depicted the roughness on the wheel tread and railhead as corrugation or waviness.
Braking frictional heat induces hot spots and develops uneven protruded patches on the tread by thermal
expansion and martensitic transformation. Severe noneven wear on subsequent rolling passes of wheel
produces roughness by cooling according to Vernersson [51]. Grassie [103110] and other researchers
[111115] depicted vertical dynamic loads excited by railhead roughness to be the cause for corrugation
formation. Johnson [57, 116] suggested corrugation to arise either from vibration normal to railhead
producing periodic plastic indentations on the surface, or by the combined action of fluctuating normal
and tangential contact forces leading to periodic slip and wear. On the basis of wavelengths, corrugations
are of two types: short wavelengths (roaring rail) in the range of 3080 mm, and long wavelength of
100800 mm [111, 117, 118]. Long wavelength corrugation observed on the rails is called waves and
it is termed out-of-roundness if found on wheels. Localized temperature rise at the contact interface
promotes plastic flow of the surface material. This in combination with vertical oscillations of the heavily
loaded rails on the flexible track ballast produces corrugation in slow-speed heavy-haul railways. These
are generally observable on rail corners. Corrugation on metro-type rails occurs by wear at tight curves
mainly due to torsional oscillations of the wheels and axle [119]. Grassie summarized the measurement
and treatment of corrugation in his review article [108] in detail.
A two-dimensional (2D) FE model [51] and an experimental model [52] are proposed by Vernersson
to study the hot spot and corrugation phenomena. Inertia forces and thus the contribution of wheel
vibration are neglected in his model.  Chen
 and Lee [28, 117] represented corrugated rail surface by
the function: z(x) = l 1 + cos(2x ) , where and l are the wavelength and amplitude of the
corrugation, respectively as shown in Figure 2. By varying corrugation wavelengths and amplitudes
for ranges of braking speeds, they observed temperature fluctuations to reduce with the increased
corrugation wavelength or reduced corrugation amplitude and vice versa.

Frictional heat calculation

The contact frictional heat leads to temperature rise confined to a thin layer of the contact surface.
Cvetkovski and Ahlstrm [43] and Cvetkovski et al. [120] considered this temperature rise to yield
thermal softening, and Kapoor [121] added that it also aggravates wear by plastic ratchetting. It favors
plastic flow of the surface material [122] and changes material properties and friction behavior [123].
This also helps martensite formation [124], thermal fatigue [3], in addition to crack initiation and
propagation [68]. All these contribute to the formation of defects like hot spots, shelling, spalling,
and corrugation that are discussed in the preceding section. It is therefore important to know how
temperature rises and decays at the wheelrail contact during running and braking situations. In this
section, the progress of temperature estimation study is presented in chronological order. Blok and Jaeger
brought forth the pioneering work on the estimation of surface temperature of sliding bodies at the end
of 1930s and early 1940s. Blok [125] formulated analytical expression for temperature rise due to sliding
of lubricated gear teeth considering a parabolic contact pressure distribution. Carslaw and Jaeger [126]
6 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

gave an analytical integral formula for the estimation of temperature rise on the half-space surface from a
moving heat flux. These analytical approaches are the fundamentals to all researchers till date attempting
to estimate frictional heat on moving contact surfaces. Generally, the temperature rise on a semi-infinite
surface, taken initially at a zero reference temperature, for a moving heat flux q(t) is expressed in terms
of per unit time per unit area at the surface (z = 0). The resultant temperature can be calculated from
[126]:
2
1/2 t ez /(4t)
Z
t
T= q (t ) d ; = 2 (1)
K 1/2 0 1/2 l

where l is the characteristic length and all other notations in the equation are defined in the nomencla-
ture. Considering the solution for the instantaneous point source as fundamental, its integration with
respect to time gives solution for the continuous point source. By integrating the solution for point
source with respect to appropriate space variables, the solutions for continuous line [127], infinite strip
[32, 128131], circle [132145], rectangle [135, 145148], square [135, 145, 149, 150], plane [151, 152],
spherical surface [32], and cylindrical surface sources [153], each with its own simple physical interpre-
tation, can be obtained. Ling [154] suggested a quasi-iterative method for computation of the interface
temperature distribution under quasi-stationary conditions. The quasi-iterative method is shown to
speed up the rate of convergence of the solution.
During the decade of 1960s, researchers formulated different approaches to establish expression for
the estimation of sliding frictional heat generation. Ling and Ng [155] expressed the temperature rise
in the slider and rider using the Greens function method for 2D, quasi-stationary heat conduction
in a moving coordinate system. They have related the nondimensional interface temperature as a
function of the fraction of contact length. Ling and Pu [156] used a stochastic model to estimate
the interface temperature of solids in sliding contact assuming a finite number of small contact spots
located stochastically. Barber [157] estimated the distribution of heat between the metals of comparable
hardness, sliding past one another to evolve a solution for the heat conduction in a single asperity
interaction. This solution requires initial temperature difference be known a priori between interacting
surfaces for meaningful results. Francis [144] assumed the interface temperature at any point in a circular
contact area to be half the harmonic mean of two single-surface temperature fields. This yielded an
increase in the maximum flash temperature by approximately 3338% higher than that of Bloks. Cheng
[158] attempted to establish the reasons for higher temperature estimation. Based on the work of Ling
[154] and Cameron et al. [159], Cheng found an elliptical heat intensity distribution consideration
in place of circular uniform heat distribution used by Blok to be the cause of discrepancy. Tanvir
[61] approximated the heat source distribution over an elliptical Hertzian contact by a fourth-order
polynomial to obtain his analytical solution applying Laplace transform and estimated the temperature
rise from

2.26Po aV 1/2 
 
1 (1 S)1/2

T= (2)
K

All the notations used in the above relation are given in the nomenclature. However, Eq. (2) applies
only to sliding speeds above about 0.1 ms1 . Further, Tanvir predicted temperature rise to be about 20%
more than that by Blok and Jaegers. The differences are attributed to the assumption of the thermal flux
distribution along the contact length. Ertz and Knothe [160] found that the method of Tanvir requires
more mathematical effort than of Jaegers [126].
An overview of thermoelastic contact problems is given in Johnsons contact mechanics book [161].
In the problem of transient heat conduction in a semi-infinite body, Lienhard [33] proposed a thermal
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 7

penetration depth given by

r
2a
= (3)
V
All the notations used are defined in the nomenclature. Tian and Kennedy [148] estimated friction-
induced contact surface nominal temperature rise in bodies of finite thickness and in cases where the
sliding contact area repeatedly sweeps over the same path of one of the contacting solids. Tian and
Kennedy [145] also found the local flash surface temperature rise for a semi-infinite body with a moving
heat source of square uniform, circular uniform, and parabolic shape, for the entire range of Peclet
number using Greens function method. Knothe and Liebelt [63] used Laplace transform and the method
of Greens function to obtain temperature rise of the wheelrail contact in relative sliding motion. Their
technique applies to conditions of arbitrary pressure distributions, including those from fluctuating loads
from surface roughness and indents. Summarily, their findings are:
(i) Pressure fluctuation increases the contact temperature.
(ii) Rough surface has less effect on the temperature rise by less than 10% of that in smooth surface.
(iii) Surface damage may have a major influence on contact temperature rise by around 30%.
Ahlstrm and Karlsson [53] addressed one-dimensional (1D) heat conduction problem in a rail
wheel during wheel slide caused by axle locking. Their analysis provided wheel surface temperature,
heating rate, temperature-affected zone for different axle loads, and elapsed time ranges.
Ertz and Knothe [160] augmented the surface contacts temperature rise estimation of Knothe and
Liebelt [63] by adding convection mode of heat transfer to their earlier assumptions of heat conduction
mode alone. Later, Ertz and Knothe [162] superimposed thermal stresses on mechanical contact stresses
to show the influence of thermal stresses on the elastic limit and the shakedown limit in a wheel
rail contact system. A comparison of maximum contact temperature obtained by different authors is
presented in Table 1.
Fischer et al. [62] elaborated the contact mechanics and heat dissipation mechanisms involved in
the wheelrail contact. The authors evaluated the flash temperature in the asperities arising from local
friction and local plastic deformation. Liu and Wang [163] gave an expression for thermoelastic stress
field in the frequency domain for stationary or translating half-space using the discrete convolution and
fast Fourier transform methods for the case of parabolic or an irregularly distributed heat source.
The statistical temperature distribution at rough surface contacts is studied by Wang and
Komvopoulos [164167] by characterizing the surfaces as fractals and assuming spherical asperity tips.
A three-dimensional (3D) thermomechanical contact of nonconforming rough surfaces is modeled
by Liu and Wang [168]. The model includes normal surface displacements caused by the contact
pressure, frictional shear, and frictional heating. Boucly et al. [169] described a thermal elasticplastic
model assuming steady-state thermal effect of rollingsliding contact problem. Their study provided a
quantitative measure of maximum von Mises residual stress and its location for different heat factors (the
product of friction coefficient and sliding speed). Gallardo-Hernandez et al. [37] estimated frictional
heat generation from a twin-disk simulation of wheelrail contact applying analytical and experimental
methods. Their model considered heat loss by conduction, convection, and radiation modes of heat
transfer.

Table 1. Comparison of maximum contact temperature estimation formulas [63] (notations of the table are given in nomenclature).
Estimated physical Knothe and Leibelt Ertz and Knothe
parameter Blok [125] Jaeger [126] Archard [132] [63] [160]
q q q q
s Po a s Po a s Po a s Po a
Tmax 1.11 K V 1.13 K V 1.14 K V 1.23 K V
Po P P P 3P 3P
a2 a2 a2 2 ab 2 ab
A Circle Square Circle Ellipse Ellipse
Set Set Contact of sphere on plane General Hertzian contact Hertzian contact
8 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

Figure 3. Schematic representation of heat flux model for calculating temperature distribution due to moving heat source (modified
from [172]).

Chen and Wang [170] suggested a 3D thermoelastoplastic contact model for counterformal bodies
by assuming steady-state heat flux, temperature-dependent strain hardening behavior, and interaction
of mechanical and thermal loads. The model simulated moving half-space over a stationary sphere.
Fast Fourier transform and conjugate gradient method-based algorithm are used for their results in
terms of surface pressure, temperature rise, subsurface stress, and plastic strain fields. Spiryagin et al.
[171] evaluated temperature for two-point contact that occurs at the curve part of the track. Kolonits
[172] presented temperature rise calculation for one-, two-, and three-dimensional conditions based on
relations of Blok, Carslaw and Jaeger as shown in Figure 3.
Gupta et al. [173] predicted temperature rise for different combinations of creep and adhesion in
a contact patch of two semi-infinite cylindrical solids initially at two different uniform temperatures.
Impact of simultaneous thermal and mechanical loadings on a railway wheel tread, as imposed by
braking and rolling contact, is reported by Vernersson [122]. Sundh and Olofsson [174] explained wear
transition phenomenon from the wheelrail contact temperature rise measured through pin-on-disk
test. They studied two cases: (i) sliding velocity <0.1 m/s representing wheel treadrailhead contact and
(ii) sliding velocity >0.1 m/s representing wheel flangerail gage contact.
A thermomechanical model is given by Shi et al. [175] to investigate the sliding contacts between
an elasticplastic hemisphere and a rigid flat at a varying slip rates. Their model considered the
temperature rise to be from asperity contacts. The effects of slip rate on friction stress and friction
coefficient are estimated. Recently, Vakkalagadda et al. [176] estimated wheel temperature by three
different approaches. In the first model, they used brake block friction, wheelrail traction slip, and
train running resistance characteristics to estimate heat generation rates at contact interfaces. Their
second model used boundary element method to estimate temperature and heat flux distribution in
wheel, brake, and rail as a function of heat inputs at interfaces, geometric parameters, and tread line
speed. Third model applied finite element method to evaluate wheel temperature, adding inputs from
the first and second models. A list of formulas, to estimate temperature rise is presented in Table 2.

Heat partitioning approach

The flow of heat generated at the brake blockwheel interface, gets distributed in a manner shown in
Figure 4. The nature and distribution of the heat resulting from temperature fields at the contact interface
obey the law of thermodynamic equilibrium. For its calculation, a heat partition factor is introduced to
maintain the continuity of temperature and conservation of heat fluxes. It reflects a remarkable effect
on the pressure distribution, the magnitude and depth of the maximum von Mises stress during loading
and the residual stress upon unloading [169]. A knowledge of the distribution of the heat partitioned is
critical to minimize its damaging effects [102].
Vernersson [51] modeled a part of the wheel rim interacting with a brake block having the same
length as the rim part. The frictional heat flux qb and qw entering to the brake block and wheel rim is
given, respectively, by
qb = (1 ) Pmean vs (4)
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 9

Table 2. Expression for temperature calculation (notations used are defined in the nomenclature).
 1/2 n o
Tanvir [61] Tw = Tr = 2.26P K
o aV
1 (1 S)1/2 ; S = vs /V
 1/2
Moyar and Stone [10] 1T = 2h 2a/V
Kw c

s P x
q
Knothe and Liebelt [63] T(x) = 2 V K
n h i h io
Ahlstrom and Karlsson [53] T = 12 e t ex / erfc x t + ex / erfc x + t ; is constant
2 t 2 t
 p 
2qw t

y

y 2 +a2
Kennedy et al. [102] T (y, t) = K ierfc ierfc
2 t 2 t
   
Vernersson [34] Tw (t, z) = Tm + (Two Tm ) erf z , Tr (t, z) = Tm + (Tro Tm ) erf z
2 t 2 t

qf 1/2 R t 1(t)
h    i
T (t) = 3/2 0 1/2 erf X erf X2b

K (tt)
h    i  2 q
Sawley [177] erf Y erf Y2a exp z2 dt; = 4 t t

q t
Spiryagin et al. [171] T = f 2 i erfc z
Kc 2 t
2q w 
TD1 ( ) = f


Kolonits [172] +1 1
2B
2q X+B u
TD2x ( ) = Kvf XB
R
e Ko (u) du
qf R
h i h i
TD3 ( , ) = erf L(1+)
+ erf L(1)
erf B(1+
)+u + erf B(1
)u du
2vK 2 0 2u 2u 2u 2u u
   2    2 
ql
TD2y (t, ) = f erf 1+
+ erf 1 1+
Ei 1+ 1
Ei 1
;
K 2 2 2 2 2 2

= Kt2
l
2

xx +(yyo )2
dx
R w/2
q(x)
Vakkalagadda et al. [176] T (x, y, t) = To + w/2 4c 0,

4t

Figure 4. Schematic of wheel, brake block, and rail where frictional heat with fluxes qw , qb , and qr are indicated.
10 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

Figure 5. Coordinate system at contact interface.

Lmodel
qw = Pvs (5)
Lcircum
In the above relation, LLcircum
model
is the ratio between model length, Lmodel and actual wheel circumference,
Lcircum to specify the mean heat input during one revolution. All other terms are defined in the
nomenclature. The value of heat partition fraction depends on the relative velocity of the contacting
bodies, contact zones dimension, and thermophysical properties of the rollingsliding bodies (i.e., Peclet
number, Pe ) (shown in Figure 5). This dimensionless parameter Pe is the ratio of the surface speed to
the rate of heat diffusion and given by
Va
Pe = (6)
2
According to Knothe and Liebelt [63] for fast-moving heat sources, Pe > 5, heat conduction occurs only
in the direction perpendicular to the contact plane. In such situation, heat flow in the longitudinal and
the lateral directions can be ignored.
A number of analytical [126, 159, 169, 178180], numerical [102, 145, 173], and experimental
[181, 182] studies are available in the literature to model the heat partitioning phenomenon. Blok
[125] matched the maximum surface temperature of two sliding bodies along the contact region
and determines the distribution of heat partitioned into each of the interfacing bodies. Jaeger [126]
formulated a steady-state solution by matching the average temperature of the two bodies at the contact
interface. This approach of matching the average temperature of the two contacting bodies is still in use
[177179] to obtain an expression for heat partition factor. Cameron et al. [159] considered a perfect
matching of the interfacial temperatures for the case of uniform heat intensity distribution. Floquet et al.
[182] applied 2D Fourier transform method developed by Ling [155], to establish a partition coefficient,
that varies along the contact length of the interface. Vakkalagadda et al. [176] used 2D boundary element
method to estimate heat partitioning at the wheelbrake block and wheelrail interfaces.
Francis [144] gave an expression for heat partition relation given in Eq. (7), where Tv and Ts are the
temperatures of the moving body and stationary body, respectively.
q
ZZ
q = dxdy (7)
(1 + Tv /Ts )
However, he could not integrate this equation analytically. So, he assumed that the true value of the heat
partition factor to be the one that best satisfied the temperature fields of the contacting surfaces. This was
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 11

attained by equating the average temperatures of the two surfaces, an approach similar to Jaegers [126].
avg avg
Tv = (1 )Ts (8)
Chao and Trigger [183] and Komanduri and Hou [147] observed that for uniform heat partition,
matching of the temperatures at all the points on either side along the contact interface poses much
difficulty. Hence, they suggested for two sliding bodies a nonuniform heat partition factor be considered.
Thus, it necessitated to match the temperature rise everywhere along the width of contact on either side
of the interface. For a variable heat partition factor, Chao and Trigger [183] proposed two different
approaches. In the first approach, a discrete numerical iterative method is used for metal cutting
operation. This method is subsequently used by Ling [154] and Bos and Moes [180] for tribological
applications. The second approach applied functional analysis method, later elaborated by Komanduri
and Hou [147]. For the distribution of matching temperature rise at the contact interface, Komanduri
and Hou [147] applied a polynomial function given by
 x m

i
i1 = 1 + 1 21 (9)
w
 x m

i
i2 = 2 + 1 + 21 (10)
w
In Eqs. (9) and (10), the terms 1 and 2 represent average heat partition fractions over the sliding
contact area of contacting bodies 1 and 2, respectively. i1 and i2 are the local heat partition fractions
at the point xi . 1 designates the maximum trial-and-correction factor at xi = 0. w is the width of
contact area, and m is a constant to be determined by trial and error method. Accordingly, Komanduri
and Hou [147] proposed an analytical solution for the temperature rise distribution that revealed the
effect of sliding speed, length of the heat source, duration of contact, and thermophysical properties of
the two sliding bodies on the heat partition fractions. The results are reported to be in good agreement
with those of their analytical formulation [184], FEM results of Kennedy [185], and experimental results
of Floquet et al. [182]. Sun et al. [178] developed an expression for transient heat partition factor of the
form
s1/2 a5/2
 
1
(t) = 1 2 ML ; M = 1.886   (11)
cs3/2 + ds + es1/2 + f s
1/2

In Eq. (11), L1 is the inverse Laplace transform, s is the Laplace transform variable, c, d, e, and f are the
functions of contact dimension a, sliding velocity s , and thermal diffusivity . The development
of the above equation is given in details by Sun et al. [87] and Sawley [177].
Gupta et al. [173] used finite element method to show that 29% of the frictional heat deposited on
the wheel surface is conducted to the rail. They used a heat partitioning factor, = 0.36. However,
their model excludes heat loss from the wheel by convection and radiation. Jergeus [186] assumed heat
partition as a function of temperature of the sliding wheel in using finite element method. Kennedy et al.
[187] observed that at high sliding velocities, the finite element model for heat partition becomes prone to
numerical oscillations due to the dominance of convective diffusion terms. To overcome these, Kennedy
et al. [102] used a special time-space quadrilateral element (DCC2D4 in ABAQUS), introduced by Yu
and Heinrich [188, 189], for convection/diffusion problems. They [102] considered a Hertzian pressure
distribution over the contact area and obtained heat partition factor using a 2D finite element analysis
treating the temperature to match everywhere of the wheel and rail contact zone.
Vernersson [34] sugessted a 2D finite element model to estimate the heat partition factor between
brake block and wheel coupled with thermal contact resistance as shown in Figure 6. Unlike previous
FEA studies [102, 173, 186189], this formulation included convection and radiation effects of heat
transfer to the surrounding. This model is capable of handling both drag and stop braking, and therefore,
useful to determine the temperature history during a full train route. Laraqi [190] investigated the effect
12 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

Figure 6. Schematic representation of heat partitioning between brake block and wheel coupled through thermal contact resis-
tance (modified from [34]).

Table 3. Expression for heat partition used by different authors.

(t)0.5
Sawley and Rosser [191] (t) =  0.5
(t)0.5 +0.863 a/v
s
Kennedy et al. [102] = 1
1+1.474 /avs
s1/2
h i . 
Sun et al. [178] (t) = 1 2 ML1 ; M = 1.886 a5/2 s1/2
cs3/2 +ds+es1/2 +f
  1/
2 ; i = 1, 2

1.06B2
+M2 1 1 a
Hernandez et al. [37] = , Bi = 2ab k vs
1.06 B1 +B2 +M1 +M2
  1/ 2 1
Kb Ab
Vernersson [34] = 1 + w K A
b w w
T T R Rw T T
Teimourimanesh et al. [79] qw = Rb +Rw + R +R
b q ; q = w b +
b b Rw +Rb Rw +Rb qb
w b w b

2 Kw w c
w
Vakkalagadda et al. [176] =
2 Kw w cw +1 Kb b cb

of contact size and velocity on thermal contact resistance of sliding bodies. A decrease in resistance is
reported with an increase in sliding speed and contact size.
Berry and Barber [181] developed an alternative specimen geometry that permits the division of
frictional heat between sliding solids of various materials experimentally. They also characterized the
microscopic thermal resistance at the surface of a sliding solid for several types of asperity interactions.
Some of the most important expressions of the heat partition factor, used by different authors are given
in Table 3. The generated heat at the brake blockwheel sliding interface is decayed through the colder
rail. This is termed as rail chill effect. The importance of rail chilling is dealt in the following section.

Rail chilling effect

After many wheel passes of a running train, the rollingsliding condition raises the temperature of the
wheel surface. This attains a steady-state temperature, after a time interval, to gain a hot wheel condition
[192]. This hot wheel on touching the relatively cooler rail transfers heat to the rail mainly by conduction.
This is generally termed as rail chill effect [193]. Its graphical representation is given in Figure 7.
Although the rail chill effect may be beneficial in view of reducing the wheel temperature, their rapid and
localized cooling is very much detrimental. On the application of brakes, sudden localized increase in
surface temperature of the hot wheel could potentially cause microstructural modification of the wheel
material, depending on the temperature attained at the wheelrail interface.
The mean heat transfer rate between the wheel and rail depends on the temperature difference in
contact surfaces, contact area, thermal contact resistance, and the duration of contact [193]. This is
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 13

Figure 7. Graphical representation of rail chill effect.

expressed by the equation

K (Tw Tr ) l
qr = A , t = (12)
t V
In effect, the portion of brakewheel contact generated heat extracted by rail is recognized as rail chill
efficiency and is specified as
Rate of heat transfer to the rail
Rail chill efficiency = (13)
Power dissipation at the brake block wheel interface
Moyar et al. [194] described quantitatively the rail chill effect from experiments with two different
railwheel dynamometer systems using a 840-mm wheel operated at 80 km h1 under full car loading.
They observed 1518% of the frictional heat developed at the brake blockwheel interface is conducted
to the rail. Teimourimanesh et al. [79] reported similar results of about 22% of total heat generated at the
interface goes in to rail. Their results are based on finite element formulation of a 2D time-dependent
convectiondiffusion equation. Test results of Stone and Carpenter [38], and Opinsky and Joerms [195]
revealed that rail chill efficiency varies between 20 and 90% for drag braking. Teimourimanesh et al.
[196], in an earlier study, identified a fall of about 100 C in the maximum wheel temperature due to
rail chill effect. From his FEA model, involving rail chill effect for the metro wheels under fully loaded
wagon, the temperature rise was evaluated as 600 C for worn wheels and 500 C for new wheels. Peng et
al. [9] formulated a 3D nonlinear finite element model to evaluate the thermal stress allowing rail chill
effect to expose their influence on the crack growth in a railway wheels. Both stop and drag braking
conditions are studied. Their results revealed the effect of rail chill on crack growth to be greater for drag
braking than for stop braking. Similar results are reported by Vernersson and Lundn [197]. Moyar and
Stone [10] considered an idealized braked rail car wheel under periodic brake-shoe thermal shock, rail
chill, and tractive rail contact stresses to demonstrate their significant thermal contributions on surface
fatigue cracking using a critical plane fatigue initiation theory. They observed that periodic rail chill on
hot braked tread strongly affects fatigue damage, as the shear stress range and tensile normal stress both
increases on the critical plane.

Thermal fatigue
Fatigue failures in the railwheel may arise from cyclic rolling contact stresses and thermal loads. The
influence of rolling contact loading and thermal loading is considered in the fatigue failure study, treating
them as separate phenomenon [3]. Recently, Vernersson et al. [122] expressed a contrary view that rolling
contact loading and thermal loading are mutually influential to tread damage. In fact, thermal loads
between wheelrail and wheelbrake block in brake-applied condition further aggravate RCF [198].
Moyar and Stone [10, 50] demonstrated the contribution of thermal and other loads in the formation
of surface fatigue cracks through multiaxial fatigue criterion developed by Socie [199]. According to
14 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

Moyar and Stone [10], fatigue strength of the material drops when temperature rises and negligible
fatigue damage occurs from cold wheel running condition. The combined effect of cyclic rolling contact
and increased temperature escalates the wheel tread plastic deformation relative to the loads acting
separately. These in turn produce tensile residual stresses in the wheel tread during their cooling cycle.
Such conditions promote the formation of thermal crack and mechanical cracks as well.
For the cyclic contact loading, Johnson [57] explained four possible ways the contacting material can
respond. The ways are perfectly elastic, elastic shakedown, plastic shakedown, and ratchetting, shown in
Figure 8. If the maximum stress of the target material in a cycle remains within the linear elastic regime,
the behavior is stated to be perfectly elastic. During the initial load application cycles, the steady cyclic
maximum stress exceeds the materials yield limit, but the nominal stress remains within its elastic limit,
elastic shakedown occurs. The steady cyclic load when exceeds the elastic limit, it produces additional
plastic deformation giving a closed plastic stressstrain loop of loading and unloading cycles. This
cancels the net unidirectional plastic strain accumulation to result in zero plastic deformation. This
process is termed plastic shakedown. When the load magnitude becomes severe, elastic shakedown
does not occur. Then every load cycle induces accumulation of plastic deformation eventually, the
deformation exceeds materials ductility, producing rupture. This process is designated by ratchetting
or incremental collapse.
Once cyclic loading activates plastic deformation in the material, their stress measure fails to reveal
its influence on fatigue life. Rather, equivalent strain criterion helps prediction of life estimation.
Cvetkovski et al. [120] characterized thermal damage for two different steels, in the temperature of
500725 C, which forms their durability study of railway wheel sets. They identified a loss in fatigue
life due to softening induced by cementite spheroidization of the original pearlitic railwheel materials.
Thermal contact fatigue is extensively studied by Lundn [200] and Mcdowell and Moyar [201]. For
the prediction of fatigue mechanism involved in railway track, a shakedown map is used by many
researchers [47, 57, 202, 203]. Significant contributions in this direction are documented by the railway
mechanics research group (CHARMEC) working at Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden. Based
on their fatigue index (FI) parameter, that represents the magnitude of the largest subsurface Dang Van
equivalent stress, Ekberg et al. [204] categorized railwheel fatigue damage in three different classes.
They are surface-initiated fatigue, subsurface-initiated fatigue, and fatigue-initiated at deep defect. The
associated mechanisms for their occurrence are given in Table 4.
In Table 4, ys is the yield shear limit of the material, aDV is a material parameter, h is hydrostatic
stress, e is the equivalent fatigue limit, F th is a function of the position of the defect below the wheel
tread, size of the defect, and load history. Fx , Fy are tangential loads in the lateral and longitudinal
directions, respectively, and Fz is the vertical load. signifies the utilized friction coefficient and is

Figure 8. Schematic representation of possible ways the contacting material responds under cyclic loading (modified from [57]).
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 15

Table 4. Fatigue damage classification and their condition for the occurrence [204, 205].
Damage pattern
Surface-initiated fatigue
Subsurface-initiated fatigue
Fatigue initiated at deep defects
Cause Threshold value of FI
2 abys
Initiated by ratchetting and/or low FIsurf = 3Fz > 0; =
cycle fatigue (LCF) of material q
Fx2 +Fy2
Fz  
Combination of high vertical loading, FIsub = 4Fzab 1 + 2 + aDV h >
bad contact geometry (giving a small e
contact patch) and locally low fatigue
resistance of the material (e.g., because
of microscopic manganese sulphide
inclusions)
Results from high cycle fatigue (HCF) FIdef = Fz > Fth
or locally at the LCF stemming from
a combination of high vertical loading
and relatively large material inclusions
of about a millimeter size

Figure 9. Schematic representation of shakedown map with work point (WP) indicated by x (modified from [204]).

the normalized vertical load given by

3Fz
= (14)
2abys
If any of the inequalities in Table 4 is satisfied, corresponding fatigue failure is predicted to occur. These
measures define a work coordinate point (, ) in the shakedown map, represented in Figure 9.
The location of the work point in the shakedown map provides the fatigue crack initiation condition.
This shakedown map clearly reveals the involved mechanism to be either by ratchetting, plastic
shakedown, or elastic shakedown. To predict fatigue initiation in rails, multiaxial low cycle fatigue (LCF)
criterion of Jiang and Sehitoglu [206] and ratchetting criterion given by Kapoor [121] are widely used.
Jiang and Sehitoglu [206] proposed a fatigue parameter (FP) on the critical plane (the plane of FPmax ),
given by
1
FP = max
+ J1 1 (15)
2
where max is the maximum normal stress, 1 is the normal strain range, 1 is the shear stress range,
1 is the shear strain range, and J is the material constant obtained from tension/torsion tests. All the
stress and strain quantities in Eq. (15) are to be taken on the critical plane. Corresponding fatigue life
16 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

(Nf ) can be determined from

 2
f


FP = (2Nf )2 b + f f (2Nf )b + c (16)
E

In Eq. (16), f and f represent the fatigue strength coefficient and the fatigue ductility coefficient,

E is Youngs modulus. b and c are the fatigue strength exponent and the fatigue ductility exponent,
respectively.
According to Kapoor [121], fatigue life for LCF is predictable by CoffinManson (NLCF ) law, stated
in Eq. (17) and ratchetting failure (Nr ) from Eq. (18). Of these two relations, whichever depicts an early
failure rules the fatigue life prediction. Thus Nf = min (NLCF , Nr ), where Nf predicts the number of
cycles to failure.
 
1p n
NLCF =c (17)
2
c
Nr = (18)
1r
In Eqs. (17) and (18), 1r is the ratchetting strain per cycle, c is the critical strain value equivalent
to rupture strain in monotonic test, 1p is the compressive strain per cycle, n is the fatigue exponent

(generally equal to 0.5), and c represents the fatigue ductility measure and it depends on strain to failure
in a monotonic test.

Crack initiation and propagation

Wheel surface temperature increases rapidly due to friction at the contact interface during braking
[177]. This helps original pearlite in the contact patch of the wheel material to transform to martensite
by sudden cooling [95]. Once the temperature of initial BCC pearlite moves above its lower critical
temperature metallurgical changes occur to form austenite of FCC crystal structure. This hot wheel
when touches rail at ambient temperature, austenite transforms to untempered martensite of BCT crystal
structure. During this conversion in the contact patch, 0.5% volume expansion is observed, inducing
residual stresses there [207]. These residual stresses in combination with rolling contact loading cycle
initiate crack in hard and brittle martensite [208]. Fletcher [209] also supported this crack-opening
mechanism from his study on near surface rail cracks subjected to thermal contact stress. He pointed
out a thin heated layer to rise up as a consequence of relieving the compressive stress caused by thermal
loading on the contacting surface. This in turn provides a crack-opening stress. Fec and Sehitoglu
[49] and Pistorius and Marais [210] indicated constraint to free thermal expansion is a necessary
ingredient of the thermal fatigue process that promote crack initiation. Huang and Ju [23, 211] explained
thermomechanical cracking from moving frictional loads.
Widiyarta et al. [212] developed a computer model of strain accumulation, ratchetting failure, and
wear that can be used to simulate and predict wear and crack initiation condition in rails. To obtain a
better prediction of the stress field, responsible for thermomechanical crack initiation, most commonly
used approaches include Hertzian theory [158, 213215], approximate elastic modeling [62, 216, 217],
finite element modeling [8, 66, 71, 170, 206, 218223], and boundary element method [55, 176, 209, 224
226]. Handa et al. [208] experimentally observed traces of fatigue crack propagation and transgranular
fracture to occur after about 130 braking cycles. After a series of full-scale experiments, Handa and
Morimoto [227] clarified that approximately 100 braking cycles, in the presence of a small normal contact
force of 30 KN magnitude, are sufficient to generate thermal cracks on wheel tread.
Once initiated, thermal crack propagates in radial direction. At a depth of about half a millimeter,
the crack tends to deviate toward a circumferential growth [228] as shown in Figure 10. Final fracture
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 17

Figure 10. Schematic representation of surface initiated fatigue crack growth (modified from [3]).

Figure 11. Schematic representation of the mechanism of entrapped fluid pressure driven crack extension (modified from [3]).

typically occurs by detachment of a piece of the surface material as the crack deviates toward the surface
[3].
To study the propagation of cracks, fracture mechanics models are suggested in [67, 220, 221, 229
236]. Analytical models [237] include simplifications, like 2D loading, simplified crack in the contact
zone, and elastic conditions. For more realistic results, FE analysis [9, 68, 220, 237239] and boundary
element modelling [209, 224] are extensively used. The presence of pressurized fluid acting to open the
crack or a fluid acting as a crack face lubricant is the commonly accepted mechanism of crack growth as
shown in Figure 11. These effects cause a marked increase in the Mode I stress intensity factor (SIF).
In the absence of trapped fluids, crack propagation by Mode I is suppressed as a result of high contact
pressure at the contact region. In such situation, crack mainly propagates under mixed Mode II and
Mode III [3] loadings. Peng et al. [2, 9, 233], Peng and Jones [240] discussed the thermal fatigue crack
growth in the railway wheels under different braking (drag and stop) conditions in several of their work.
From generalized FrostDugdale approach, these authors modeled thermal fatigue crack law involving
the effect of rail chill phenomenon. The consequent law is stated in Eq. (19). The results indicated crack
growth to be greater in drag braking case than in the case of stop braking.

da 
1 
= C a(1 /2) 1K Kmax (19)
dN
The notations used in Eq. (19) are defined in the nomenclature. To investigate rail cracks subjected to
combined thermal and contact loadings, Fletcher [209] considered boundary element modeling. He
obtained SIF values at three different temperatures (20, 500, and 1000 C). His predicted peak SIF values
are found to be insufficient to cause crack growth at 20 and 500 C contact temperatures. However, for
the case of 1000 C, the predicted SIF approaches the fracture toughness values of typical rail steels very
closely.
Wheelrail defects arising from thermomechanical loading, their characterization, and mitigation
measures are summarized in Table 5 for consolidation of their salient information.
Table 5. Defect characterization, causes, their harmful effects, and mitigation measures.
Defect
Hot spots [49, 51, 76, 79, 81, 82,
225]
Shelling [8, 34, 82101]
Spalling [8, 34, 82101]
Corrugations [51, 52, 57, 102
116]
Characteristics
Size ranges from 3 to 40 mm in
diameter.
Occurs at temperature reach-
ing above lower critical temper-
ature.
Loss of piece of metal from wheel
tread and railhead.
Occurs beneath the plastically
worked layer.
Localized degradation of
running surface of the rail/wheel.
Cracking induced by phase
transformation stress from the
martensite formation of surface
material.
Wave like irregularities on the
running surface of the rails.
Causes
High-localized stress region
because of the severe
temperature gradients
associated with them.
Subsurface fatigue
phenomenon associated with
high contact stress.
Shelling cracks grow at an
acute angle to the surface.
Presence of nonmetallic
inclusions located within the rail
or wheel surface.
Surface fatigue phenomenon.
Spalling cracks form
perpendicular and parallel to the
wheel tread or railhead surface.
Differential wear caused by a
repetitious longitudinal sliding
action of wheel on rail.
Excitation of the torsional
resonance of the wheelset.
High dynamic loading leading
to higher contact stresses and
plastic flow of rail material.
Effects
Thermal fatigue initiates thermal
crack and corrugation or may
result waviness.
Creates irregularities on the
rail/wheel surface.
Further increases the dynamic
load. Makes the rail and wheel
unserviceable.
May lead to derailments.
Creates irregularities on the
railwheel surface.
Further increases the dynamic
load.
Makes the rail and wheel
unserviceable.
May lead to derailments.
Further increases the dynamic
load.
Wavy motion in vertical
direction.
Noise and vibration often
called as roaring rails.
18
Mitigation measures
Avoid Drag braking. It lowers the
steel strength.
Regular inspection for stuck
brakes, and also high brake
cylinder pressure. These are the
root cause for defect initiation.
Proper release of hand brake
to avoid unwanted wheel tread
heating.
J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.
Use of high strength steel
increased shear yield strength to
minimize plastic flow and delay
the onset of rolling contact
fatigue.
Improvement in wheelrail
lubrication system to avoid rail
surface contamination and to
reduce fatigue crack growth. It
also reduces creep forces.
Selection of rail grinding
profiles to minimize contact
stresses.
Optimization of wheel profile
to ease steering and lower
contact stresses. To improve the
dynamic characteristics
(hunting) of wheelsets to reduce
the creep forces at the wheel rail
interface.
Wheel reprofiling at
appropriate intervals to
eliminate tread profile damages
that cause high contact stresses
such as hollow treads, false
flanges, etc.
Improvements in the
cleanliness of the rail steels this
will reduce the number of
inclusions that can act as
initiation sites for the defects.
This aspect is of particular
relevance to shelling and
transverse defects.
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 19

Discussions
This article presents a systematic technical review on the influence of thermomechanical load in
producing variety of defects and means of quantifying the temperature rise at the wheelrail contact
interface. The phenomena like hotspot, shelling, spalling, and corrugation are elaborated to specify their
importance in safe and trouble-free operation of the railway transport system. The most common cause
for the localized temperature rise can be found in brake application conditions. Corresponding heat
transfer conditions are capable to initiate thermal fatigue load on the top of traction (frictional)-induced
contact fatigue load. The fundamental model for temperature estimation from the heat conduction law
assumes different shapes of heat sources on semi-infinite body as pioneered by Blok, Carslaw and Jaeger.
Researchers worldwide in tackling the brakewheelrail contact problems to reveal the mechanism and
condition for the onset of various defects later use this procedure with some modification. These are
addressed in this review work.
Frictional heat induced by braking causes rail chill effect responsible for crack formation by phase
transformation of pearlite steel to martensite. Associated heat transfer calculations primarily use heat
partitioning method of Blok and Jaeger by incorporating minor modifications to the problem boundary
conditions. The pertinent relations are given in Table 2. The present study intends to provide with
ready information on temperature rise calculation associated with running and stopping of railwheel
system. These in turn produce temperature-dependent defect formations and thermomechanical fatigue
crack growth. Fatigue mechanisms associated with surface, subsurface, and deep defects are addressed.
Cyclic (period or aperiodic) temperature rise modifies compressive contact stress distribution to induce
residual tensile stress along with a shear stress distribution. Life prediction relations based on ratchetting,
multiaxial fatigue damage model of Jiang and Sehitoglu [206], and LCF or ratchetting failure (RF) model
by Kapoor [121], given in Eqs. (15 or 16) and (17 or 18), respectively, are provided for users convenience.
Prediction of thermal fatigue crack growth involving the effect of rail chill under drag braking and
stop braking conditions as depicted by Peng et al. and Peng and Jones [2, 9, 233, 240] indicates that
crack growth is larger in the former case. Associated life estimation is given in Eq. (19). This abridged
article envisions enhanced research in future to ease maintenance and operation of entire rail transport
system.

Conclusion
The demand for higher axle load, safer and comfortable passenger, and freight movement requires
constant surveillance of wheelrail contact condition from its technological viewpoint. In order to bring
in as best possible details on thermal loads induced defects, including RCF, arising out of braking, are
presented. Means for temperature estimation evolved from the frictional contact heating are detailed
along with relevant relations to augment the scope of better utilization of available knowledge and
efficient use of material. This also may help to improve maintenance strategy. Defects occurring due
to temperature rise appear to have very significant implications for the overall economic operation of
the railway transport system. Their presence not only results in material loss but also generates noise and
vibration transmitted to the commuter as well as the surroundings of rail layout. Fatigue life estimation
involving rail chill effect and local plastic deformation producing ratchetting is delivered. Consequent
life estimation relations are also provided for completeness of this presentation. This review article keeps
in view that thermal load and the connected defects evolution to be considered together for the better
revelation of detrimental contact material responses.
The necessity to improve the railway system integrity, their reliability, reduce maintenance and
operating costs, increase reprofiling duration and extend better safety with comfort are all topics of
constant interest that demand incremental research. This process is still in progress. This article could
have not been presented without the contribution of many thousands of researchers and scientists around
the world. All the authors mentioned in reference are respectfully acknowledged. From a wide range of
20 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

available resources, only the most relevant concepts and documents are cited in this review for fulfillment
of the presentation. It is expected that this abridged technical review will help to improve wheelrail set
design and performance standards to extend enhanced safety and comfort to its applicators and users as
well.

Nomenclature
a, b Length and width of contact ellipse
aDV Material parameter
a Initial semi crack length
A Contact area
Ab , Aw Area swept by contact at brake and wheel
b, c Fatigue strength and ductility exponent
B, L Dimensionless group similar to Peclet number
c, cb , cw Specific heat, specific heat of brake block and wheel
C Fatigue crack growth constant in the generalized FrostDugdale model
c, d, e, f Function of contact length, thermal diffusivity, and sliding velocity
E Youngs modulus
FP Fatigue parameter
FI Fatigue index parameter
FIdef Fatigue index parameter for deep defect
FIsub Fatigue index parameter for subsurface
FIsurf Fatigue index parameter for surface
Fth Function of the defect position, defect size, and load history
Fx , Fy , Fz Lateral load, longitudinal load, and vertical load
h Specific heating rate
J Material constant from tension/torsion test
K Thermal conductivity
Kb , Kw Thermal conductivity of brake and wheel
Ko (u) Bessel function (second kind)
Kmax Maximum stress intensity factor
1K Stress intensity value range
l Characteristic length of contact patch
Lcircum , Lmodel Length of wheel circumference and model
m Constant to be determined by trial and error method
M1,2 Thermal responsivity of body 1 and body 2
n Fatigue exponent
N Cycle number
Nf Fatigue life
NLCF Low cycle fatigue life
Nr Fatigue life based on ratchetting failure
P Applied load
Pe Peclet number
Pmean Braking pressure
Po Maximum contact pressure
qf Heat flux generated due to friction
q, qb , qr , qw Heat flux, heat flux entering brake, rail, and wheel
Rb , Rw Thermal resistance at brake and wheel
s Laplace transform variable
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 21

S Slip ratio
t, Time and dimensionless time
t Time in contact of the point
T Temperature
TD1 , TD2x , TD2y , TD3 Temperature distribution in one dimension,
two dimensions along x and y directions, and three dimensions
To , Tm Initial and common temperatures at contact
Two , Tro Temperature of wheel and rail prior to contact
Tb , Tr , Tw Temperature at brake, rail, and wheel
Tv , Ts Temperature of moving and stationary bodies
avg avg
Tv , Ts Average temperatures of moving and stationary bodies
1T Peak temperature change
v Speed of heat source on the limiting plane along negative x direction
V Forward velocity
vs Sliding velocity
w Half-width of the heat source in the direction of motion
w Specific weight
x, y, z Coordinate axes
Heat partition factor
1 , 2 Heat partition factor for body 1 and body 2
i1 , i2 Local heat partition factor for body 1 and body 2
1 Net contact angle for the brake block
1 Maximum trial and correction factor
Constant
1 Shear strain range
Thermal penetration depth

f Fatigue ductility coefficient
c Critical strain value
1r Ratchetting strain per cycle
1 Normal strain range
1p Compressive strain per cycle
, b , w Density, density of brake block and wheel
, w , b Thermal diffusivity, thermal diffusivity of wheel and brake
, l Wavelength and amplitude of corrugation
Coefficient of friction
Utilized friction coefficient
Normalized vertical load
ys Yield shear limit of the material
1 Shear stress range
, Dimensionless coordinates
, Generalized FrostDugdale fatigue crack growth equation exponent
e Equivalent fatigue limit
Pl Proportional limit
el Elastic limit
y Yield limit
pl Plastic Limit
h Hydrostatic stress
max Maximum normal stress

f Fatigue strength coefficient
22 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

References
1. D. E. Hackenberger and C. P. Lonsdale, An Initial Feasibility Study to Develop a Wayside Cracked Railroad Wheel
Detector, Railroad Conference, 1998. Proceedings of the 1998 ASME/IEEE Joint, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 6577, April
1998.
2. D. Peng, R. Jones, and T. Constable, A Study into Crack Growth in a Railway Wheel Under Thermal Stop Brake
Loading Spectrum, Eng. Fail. Anal., vol. 25, pp. 280290, 2012.
3. A. Ekberg and E. Kabo, Fatigue of Railway Wheels and Rails Under Rolling Contact and Thermal LoadingAn
Overview, Wear, vol. 258, no. 78, pp. 12881300, 2005.
4. J. Ahlstrm and B. Karlsson, Modelling of Heat Conduction and Phase Transformations During Sliding of Railway
Wheels, Wear, vol. 253, no. 12, pp. 291300, 2002.
5. M. W. Brown, S. Hemsworth, S. L. Wong, and R. J. Allen, Rolling Contact Fatigue Crack Growth in Rail Steel,
Proceedings of the second Mini Conference on Contact Mechanics and Wear of Rail/Wheel Systems, Budapest, Hungary,
pp. 144153, July 1996.
6. Y. Liu and S. Mahadevan, Threshold Stress Intensity Factor and Crack Growth Rate Prediction Under Mixed-mode
Loading, Eng. Fract. Mech., vol. 74, pp. 332345, 2007.
7. A. Hassani and R. Ravaee, Characterization of Transverse Crack and Crack Growth in a Railway Rail, Iran. J. Mater.
Sci. Eng., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 2231, 2008.
8. R. Lundn, Elastoplastic Modelling of Subsurface Crack Growth in Rail/Wheel Contact Problems, Fatigue Fract. Eng.
Mater. Struct., vol. 30, no. 10, pp. 905914, 2007.
9. D. Peng, R. Jones, and T. Constable, An Investigation of the Influence of Rail Chill on Crack Growth in a Railway
Wheel Due to Braking Loads, Eng. Fract. Mech., vol. 98, pp. 114, 2013.
10. G. J. Moyar and D. H. Stone, An Analysis of the Thermal Contributions Shelling to Railway Wheel, Wear, vol. 144,
pp. 117138, 1991.
11. H. Krause and G. Poll, Plastic Deformations of Wheel-rail Surfaces, Wear, vol. 113, pp. 123130, 1986.
12. Z. Shuguang, Z. Weihua, and J. I. N. Xuesong, Dynamics of High Speed Wheel/rail System and Its Modelling, Chinese
Sci. Bull., vol. 52, no. 11, pp. 15661575, 2007.
13. M. Ahmadian and S. Yang, Effect of System Nonlinearities on Locomotive Bogie Hunting Stability, Veh. Syst. Dyn.
Int. J. Veh. Mech. Mobil., vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 364384, 1998.
14. A. H. Wickens, Non-Linear Dynamics of Railway Vehicles, Veh. Syst. Dyn. Int. J. Veh. Mech. Mobil., vol. 15,
pp. 289301, 1986.
15. J. Piotrowski and H. Chollet, Wheel Rail Contact Models for Vehicle System Dynamics Including Multi-point
Contact, Veh. Syst. Dyn. Int. J. Veh. Mech. Mobil., vol. 43, no. 7, pp. 455483, 2005.
16. X. Liu and W. Zhai, Analysis of Vertical Dynamic Wheel/Rail Interaction Caused by Polygonal Wheels on High-speed
Trains, Wear, vol. 314, no. 12, pp. 282290, 2014.
17. J. Piotrowski and W. Kik, A Simplified Model of Wheel/Rail Contact Mechanics for Non-Hertzian Problems and Its
Application in Rail Vehicle Dynamic Simulations, Veh. Syst. Dyn. Int. J. Veh. Mech. Mobil., vol. 46, no. 12, pp. 2748,
2008.
18. A. Bhaskar, K. L. Johnson, G. D. Wood, and J. Woodhouse, Wheel-rail Dynamics with Closely Conformal Contact
Part 1: Dynamic Modelling and Stability Analysis, Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 211,
pp. 1126, 1997.
19. S. Yamashita, Numerical Procedure for Dynamic Simulation of Two-Point Wheel/Rail Contact and Flange Climb
Derailment of Railroad Vehicles, J. Comput. Nonlinear Dyn., vol. 7, pp. 17, 2012.
20. S. Alfi, F. Braghin, and S. Bruni, Numerical and Experimental Evaluation of Extreme Wheel-rail Loads for Improved
Wheelset Design, Veh. Syst. Dyn. Int. J. Veh. Mech. Mobil., vol. 46, pp. 431444, 2008.
21. G. Lombaert and G. Degrande, Ground-borne Vibration Due to Static and Dynamic Axle Loads of InterCity and
High-speed Trains, J. Sound Vib., vol. 319, no. 35, pp. 10361066, 2009.
22. J. J. Kalker, A Fast Algorithm for the Simplified Theory of Rolling Contact, Veh. Syst. Dyn. Int. J. Veh. Mech. Mobil.,
vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 113, 1982.
23. J. H. Huang and F. D. Ju, Thermomechanical Cracking Due to Moving Frictional Loads, Wear, vol. 102, pp. 81104,
1985.
24. V. Gupta, G. T. Hahn, P. C. Bastias, and C. A. Rubin, Thermal-mechanical Modelling of the Rolling-plus-sliding with
Frictional Heating of Alocomotive Wheel, J. Eng. Ind., vol. 117, no. 3, pp. 418422, 1995.
25. D.-J. Kim, Y.-M. Lee, J.-S. Park, and C.-S. Seok, Thermal Stress Analysis for a Disk Brake of Railway Vehicles with
Consideration of the Pressure Distribution on a Frictional Surface, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, vol. 483484, pp. 456459,
2008.
26. P. T. Zwierczyk and K. Vradi, Frictional Contact FE Analysis in a Railway Wheel-rail Contact, Period. Polytech. Mech.
Eng., vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 9399, 2014.
27. M. R. K. Vakkalagadda, D. K. Srivastava, A. Mishra, and V. Racherla, Performance Analyses of Brake Blocks Used by
Indian Railways, Wear, vol. 328329, pp. 6476, 2015.
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 23

28. Y.-C. Chen and S.-Y. Lee, Elastic-Plastic Wheel-Rail Thermal Contact on Corrugated Rails During Wheel Braking,
J. Tribol., vol. 131, no. 1, pp. 011401:19, 2009.
29. W. Zhong, W. Qin, G. Jun, and Q. Liu, Influence of Normal Force and Tangential Braking Force on the Fatigue
Damage, Appl. Phys. Res., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 198201, 2010.
30. J. E. Gordon and O. Orringer, Investigation of the Effects of Braking System Configurations on Thermal Input to
Commuter Car Wheels, Report No. DOT/FRA/ORD-96/06, US Department of Transportation, Fedral Railroad
Administration, 1996.
31. T. P. Newcomb, Thermal Aspects of Railway Braking, Proceedings Institution of Mechanical Engineers International
Conference on Railway Braking, University of York, England, pp. 718, September 1979.
32. H. S. Carslaw and J. C. Jaeger, Conduction of Heat in Solids, Oxford University Press, New York, 1959.
33. J. H. Lienhard, A Heat Transfer Handbook, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1981.
34. T. Vernersson, Temperatures at Railway Tread Braking. Part 1: Modelling, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid
Transit., vol. 221, no. 2, pp. 167182, 2007.
35. L. Wu, Z. Wen, W. Li, and X. Jin, Thermo-elasticplastic Finite Element Analysis of Wheel/Rail Sliding Contact,
Wear, vol. 271, no. 12, pp. 437443, 2011.
36. S. S. Deshpande, S. Srikari, V. K. Banthia, K. Jagadeesh, and N. Chowdhary, Investigation of Effects of Different
Braking Systems on Rail Wheel Spalling, SASTECH J., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 110, 2010.
37. E. A. Gallardo-Hernandez, R. Lewis, and R. S. Dwyer-Joyce, Temperature in a Twin-disc Wheel/Rail Contact
Simulation, Tribol. Int., vol. 39, no. 12, pp. 16531663, 2006.
38. D. H. Stone and G. F. Carpenter, Wheel Thermal Damage Limits, Proceedings of the ASME/IEEE Joint Railroad
Conference, Chicago, IL, pp. 5763, March 1994.
39. L. Benes, On WheelRail Contact Surface Phenomena with Structural Changes and White Etching Layers Genera-
tion, Transport, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 196205, 2012.
40. K. Karttunen, E. Kabo, and A. Ekberg, The Influence of Track Geometry Irregularities on Rolling Contact Fatigue,
Wear, vol. 314, no. 12, pp. 7886, 2014.
41. T. Makino, T. Kato, and K. Hirakawa, The Effect of Slip Ratio on the Rolling Contact Fatigue Property of Railway
Wheel Steel, Int. J. Fatig., vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 6879, 2012.
42. T. Telliskivi and U. Olofsson, Wheel Rail Wear Simulation, Wear, vol. 257, pp. 11451153, 2004.
43. K. Cvetkovski and J. Ahlstrm, Characterisation of Plastic Deformation and Thermal Softening of the Surface Layer
of Railway Passenger Wheel Treads, Wear, vol. 300, no. 12, pp. 200204, 2013.
44. D. Majcherczak, P. Dufrenoy, and Y. Berthier, Tribological, Thermal and Mechanical Coupling Aspects of the Dry
Sliding Contact, Tribol. Int., vol. 40, no. 5, pp. 834843, 2007.
45. A. Kapoor, F. Franklin, S. Wong, and M. Ishida, Surface Roughness and Plastic Flow in Rail Wheel Contact, Wear,
vol. 253, no. 12, pp. 257264, 2002.
46. O. Orringer, W. R. Paxton, D. E. Gray, and P. K. Raj, Residual Stress and Its Consequences on Both Sides of the
Wheel-rail Interface, Wear, vol. 191, no. 12. pp. 2534, 1996.
47. A. Kapoor and K. L. Johnson, Effect of Changes in Contact Geometry on Shakedown of Surfaces in Rolling/Sliding
Contact, Int. J. Mech. Sci., vol. 34, pp. 223239, 1992.
48. J. L. V. Swaay, The Mechanism of Thermal Cracking in Railway Wheels, Proceedings of the 3rd International Wheelset
Congress, Sheffield, England, vol. 3, pp. 8, July 1969.
49. M. C. Fec and H. Sehitoglu, Termal-mechanical Damage in Railroad Wheels Due to Hot Spotting, Wear, vol. 102, pp.
3142, 1985.
50. D. H. Stone and G. J. Moyar, Wheel Shelling and Spalling: An Interpretive Review, Proceeding of the ASME Winter
Annual Meeting, New York, pp. 1931, January 1989.
51. T. Vernersson, Thermally Induced Roughness of Tread Braked Railway Wheels Part 2: Modelling and Field
Measurements, Wear, vol. 236, pp. 106116, 1999.
52. T. Vernersson, Thermally Induced Roughness of Tread-braked Railway Wheels Part 1: Brake Rig Experiments, Wear,
vol. 236, pp. 96105, 1999.
53. J. Ahlstrm and B. Karlsson, Analytical 1D Model for Analysis of the Thermally Affected Zone Formed During
Railway Wheel Skid, Wear, vol. 232, no. 1, pp. 1524, 1999.
54. Y. Liu, B. Stratman, and S. Mahadevan, Fatigue Crack Initiation Life Prediction of Railroad Wheels, Int. J. Fatig.,
vol. 28, no. 7, pp. 747756, 2006.
55. Y. Liu, Stochastic Modeling of Multiaxial Fatigue and Fracture, PhD Thesis, Graduate School of Vanderbilt University,
Nashville, Tennessee, 2006.
56. H. Krause and G. Poll, Wear of Wheel-rail Surfaces, Wear, vol. 113, no. 1. pp. 103122, 1986.
57. K. L. Johnson, The Strength of Surfaces in Rolling Contact, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci., vol. 203,
pp. 151163, 1989.
58. C. L. Murray, Wheelslip and Apt, Railw. Eng., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 2227, 1978.
59. B. Paul, Railroad Track Mechanics and Technology, Elsevier, Proceedings of a Symposium Held at Princeton University,
April 2123, 1975.
24 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

60. F. W. Carter, On the Action of Locomotive Driving Wheel, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, vol. 112, pp. 151157, 1926.
61. M. A. Tanvir, Temperature Rise Due to Slip between Wheel and RailAn Analytical Solution for Hertzian Contact,
Wear, vol. 61, no. 2, pp. 295308, 1980.
62. F. D. Fischer, W. Daves, and E. A. Werner, On the Temperature in the Wheel Rail Rolling Contact, Fatig. Fract. Eng.
Mater. Struct., vol. 26, pp. 9991006, 2003.
63. K. Knothe and S. Liebelt, Determination of Temperatures for Sliding Contact with Applications for Wheel-rail
Systems, Wear, vol. 189, pp. 9199, 1995.
64. J. E. Garnham and C. L. Davis, The Role of Deformed Rail Microstructure on Rolling Contact Fatigue Initiation,
Wear, vol. 265, no. 910, pp. 13631372, 2008.
65. R. Song, D. Ponge, D. Raabe, and R. Kaspar, Microstructure and Crystallographic Texture of an Ultrafine Grained
CMn Steel and Their Evolution During Warm Deformation and Annealing, Acta Mater., vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 845858,
2005.
66. S. Caprioli and A. Ekberg, Numerical Evaluation of the Material Response of a Railway Wheel Under Thermome-
chanical Braking Conditions, Wear, vol. 314, pp. 181188, 2014.
67. S. Caprioli, Short Rolling Contact Fatigue and Thermal Cracks Under Frictional Rolling A Comparison Through
Simulations, Eng. Fract. Mech., vol. 141, pp. 260273, 2015.
68. S. Caprioli, T. Vernersson, and A. Ekberg, Thermal Cracking of A Railway Wheel Tread Due to Tread Braking-critical
Crack Sizes and in Fluence of Repeated Thermal Cycles, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 227,
no. 1, pp. 1018, 2012.
69. J. Lan, J. Y. Li, Y. Liang, S. Nan, and D. Y. Dong, Thermal Analysis for Brake Disks of SiC/6061 Al Alloy Co-continuous
Composite for CRH3 During Emergency Braking Considering Airflow Cooling, Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China,
vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 27832791, 2012.
70. M. S. Milosevic, D. S. Stamenkovic, A. P. Milojevic, and M. M. Tomic, Modeling Thermal Effects in Braking Systems
of Railway Vehicles, Thermal Sci., vol. 16, no. 2. pp. S515S526, 2012.
71. L. Ramanan, R. Krishna Kumar, and R. Sriraman, Thermo-mechanical Finite Element Analysis of a Rail Wheel, Int.
J. Mech. Sci., vol. 41, no. 45, pp. 487505, 1999.
72. P. T. Zwierczyk and K. Vradi, Thermal Stress Analysis of a Railway Wheel in Sliding-Rolling Motion, J. Tribol.,
vol. 136, no. 3, p. 031401:18, 2014.
73. R. Enblom and M. Berg, Simulation of Railway Wheel Profile Development Due to WearInfluence of Disc Braking
and Contact Environment, Wear, vol. 258, no. 78, pp. 10551063, 2005.
74. A. Adamowicz and P. Grzes, Influence of Convective Cooling on a Disc Brake Temperature Distribution during
Repetitive Braking, Appl. Therm. Eng., vol. 31, no. 1415, pp. 21772185, 2011.
75. M. O. Petinrin and J. O. Oji, Numerical Simulation of Thermoelastic Contact Problem of DiscBrake with Frictional
Heat Generation, New York Sci. J., vol. 5, no. 10, pp. 15, 2012.
76. H. Kasem, J. F. Brunel, P. Dufrnoy, M. Siroux, and B. Desmet, Thermal Levels and Subsurface Damage Induced by
the Occurrence of Hot Spots during High-energy Braking, Wear, vol. 270, no. 56, pp. 355364, 2011.
77. J. R. Barber, Thermoelasticity and Contact, J. Therm. Stress., vol. 22, no. 45, pp. 513525, 1999.
78. L. Afferrante and M. Ciavarella, Frictionally Excited Thermoelastic Instability in the Presence of Contact Resistance,
J. Strain Anal., vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 351357, 2004.
79. S. Teimourimanesh, T. Vernersson, and R. Lunden, Modelling of Temperatures during Railway Tread Braking:
Influence of Contact Conditions and Rail Cooling Effect, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 228,
no. 1, pp. 93109, 2012.
80. J. R. Barber and M. Ciavarella, Contact Mechanics, Int. J. Solids Struct., vol. 37, pp. 2943, 2000.
81. S. Panier, P. Dufrnoy, and D. Weichert, An Experimental Investigation of Hot Spots in Railway Disc Brakes, Wear,
vol. 256, no. 78, pp. 764773, 2004.
82. M. Petersson, Noise-related Roughness of Railway Wheel Treads Full-Scale Testing of Brake Blocks, Proc. IMechE,
Part F J Rail Rapid Transit., vol. 214, no. 2, pp. 6377, 2000.
83. Y. Okagata, Design Technologies for Railway Wheels and Future Prospects, Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal
Technical Report no. 105, Osaka, 2013.
84. K. Kondo, K. Yoroizaka, and Y. Sato, Cause, Increase, Diagnosis, Countermeasures and Elimination of Shinkansen
Shelling, Wear, vol. 191, pp. 199203, 1996.
85. T. Kato and T. Makino, Effect of Material Strength on Shelling Property of Railway Wheel Steel, J. Soc. Mater. Sci.
Japan, vol. 61, no. 8, pp. 698703, 2012.
86. E. Magel and J. Kalousek, Martensite and Contact Fatigue Initiated Wheel Defect, Proceedings of 12th International
Wheelset Congress, Qingdao, China, pp. 100111, September 1998.
87. J. Sun, K. J. Sawley, and D. H. Stone, Progress in the Reduction of Wheel Spalling, Proceedings of 12th International
Wheelset Congress, Qingdao, China, vol. 12, pp. 1829, September 1998.
88. E. Magel and J. Kalousek, Identifying and Interpreting Wheel Defects, IHHA Conference, Montreal, Canada, pp. 5.8
5.21, June 1996.
89. W. Wang, J. Guo, and Q. Liu, Experimental study on wear and spalling behaviors of railway wheel, Chinese J. Mech.
Eng., vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 12431249, 2013.
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 25

90. R. Muller, Wheels, Terminology and Catalog of Defects, Swiss Federal Railways Annex 10 for Wt RM 502/97 Section
D, 1997.
91. K. L. Johnson, The Mechanics of Plastic Deformation of Surface and Subsurface Layers in Rolling and Sliding Contact,
Key Eng. Mater., vol. 33, pp. 1734, 1989.
92. J. Kalousek, E. Magel, J. Strasser, W. N. Caldwell, G. Kanevsky, and B. Blevius, Tribological Interrelationship of Sea-
sonal Fluctuations of Freight Car Wheel Wear, Contact Fatigue Shelling and Composition Brakeshoe Consumption,
Wear, vol. 191, pp. 210218, 1996.
93. D. H. Stone, V. Sharma, and G. J. Moyer, Prediction of Wheel Shelling on 263,000-,286,000-,315,000-unit Train Cars,
Proceedings of the AREA-ASME Joint Railroad Conference, Florida, USA, pp. 4550, October 1990.
94. S. Cummings, Service Wheel Temperatures and Car Condition in Relation to Thermal Mechanical Shelling, ASME
2008 Rail Transportation Division Fall Technical Conference, Chicago, IL, September 2008.
95. Daniel Stone, An Interpretive Literature Review of Wheel Shelling, ASME 2008 Rail Transportation Division Fall
Technical Conference, Chicago, IL, September 2008.
96. R. K. Steele, The Effect of Metal Removal, Steel Cleanliness and Wheel Load on the Fatigue Life of Rail, Wear, vol. 144,
pp. 7187, 1991.
97. M. Guagliano and L. Vergani, Experimental and Numerical Analysis of Sub-surface Cracks in Railway Wheels, Eng.
Fract. Mech., vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 255269, 2005.
98. E. Lansler, Subsurface Rolling Contact Fatigue Cracks in Railway Wheels-elastoplastic Deformations and Mecha-
nisms of Propagation, PhD Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, 2005.
99. S. Bogdanski, P. Lewicki, and M. Szynaniak, Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of the Phenomenon of
Filling the RCF Crack with Liquid, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Contact Mechanics and Wear of
Rail/Wheel Systems, Gothenburg, Sweden, pp. 377383, June 2003.
100. J. Ringsberg, Shear Mode Growth of Short Surface-Breaking RCF Cracks, Proceedings of the 6th Interna-
tional Conference on Contact Mechanics and Wear of Rail/Wheel System, Gothenburg, Sweden, pp. 2938, June
2003.
101. D. E. Sonon, J. V. Pellegrino, and J. M. Wandrisco, Metallurgical Examination of Rails with Service Developed Defects
(Rail Analysis Volume 4), vol. 4. Association of American Railroads, Track Train Dynamics, 1978, 1978.
102. T. C. Kennedy, C. Plengsaard, and R. F. Harder, Transient Heat Partition Factor for a Sliding Railcar Wheel, Wear,
vol. 261, no. 78, pp. 932936, 2006.
103. S. L. Grassie and J. Kalousek, Rail Corrugation: Characteristics, Causes and Treatments, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F
J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 207, no. 1, pp. 5768, 1993.
104. S. L. Grassie, Short Wavelength Rail Corrugation: Field Trials and Measuring Technology, Wear, vol. 191,
pp. 149160, 1996.
105. S. L. Grassie and J. W. Edwards, Development of Corrugation as a Result of Varying Normal Load, Wear, vol. 265,
no. 910, pp. 11501155, 2008.
106. S. L. Grassie, Rail Corrugation: Characteristics, Causes, and Treatments, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid
Transit, vol. 223, no. 6, pp. 581596, 2009.
107. S. L. Grassie, The Corrugation of Railway Track, PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge, 1979.
108. S. L. Grassie, Rail Corrugation: Advances in Measurement, Understanding and Treatment, Wear, vol. 258, no. 78,
pp. 12241234, 2005.
109. S. L. Grassie, Mechanics and Fatigue in Wheel/Rail Contact, Proceedings of the Third International Conference on
Contact Mechanics and Wear of Rail/Wheel Systems, Cambridge, England, July 1991.
110. S. L. Grassie, Mechanisms for Corrugation Initiation Involving Variations in (a) Longitudinal Traction and (b) Spin
Moment and Frictional Dissipation, Seminar of the Institution of Mechenical Engineering on Rail Corrugation, London,
England, September 1983.
111. Y. Suda, Effects of Vibration System and Rolling Conditions on the Development of Corrugations, Wear, vol. 144,
no. 12, pp. 227242, 1991.
112. D. R. Ahlbeck and L. E. Daniels, Investigation of Rail Corrugation on the Baltimore Metro, Wear, vol. 144, no. 12,
pp. 197210, 1991.
113. Q. Y. Liu, B. Zhang, and Z. R. Zhou, An Experimental Study of Rail Corrugation, Wear, vol. 255, no. 712,
pp. 11211126, 2003.
114. R. A. Clark, G. A. Scott, and W. Poole, Short Wave Corrugations-an Explanation Based on Stick-slip Vibrations,
Appl. Mech. Rail Transp. Symp., ASME, vol. 2, pp. 141148, 1988.
115. L. Baeza, P. Vila, A. Roda, and J. Fayos, Prediction of Corrugation in Rails Using a Non-stationary Wheel-rail Contact
Model, Wear, vol. 265, no. 910, pp. 11561162, 2008.
116. K. L. Johnson and G. G. Gray, Development of Corrugations on Surfaces in Rolling Contact, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.,
vol. 189, no. 1, pp. 567580, 1975.
117. Y. Chen, L. Chen, and S. Lee, A Wheel and a Corrugated Rail Thermal Contact Simulation during Braking Sliding,
IFToMM World Congrees, Besancon, France, vol. 12, June 2007.
118. D. R. Ahlbeck and L. E. Daniels, Investigation of Rail Corrugations on the Baltimore Metro, Wear, vol. 144, no. 12,
pp. 197210, 1991.
26 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

119. F. Falco and E. R. Corazza, Torsional Oscillations of Axles and Undulatory Wear of the Track (in Italian), Ingeneria
Ferrov., vol. 3, 1971.
120. K. Cvetkovski, J. Ahlstrm, and B. Karlsson, Thermal Softening of Fine Pearlitic Steel and Its Effect on the Fatigue
Behaviour, Procedia Eng., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 541545, 2010.
121. A. Kapoor, Wear by plastic ratchetting, Wear, vol. 212, no. 1, pp. 119130, 1997.
122. T. Vernersson, S. Caprioli, E. Kabo, H. Hansson, and A. Ekberg, Wheel Tread Damage: A Numerical Study of Railway
Wheel Tread Plasticity Under Thermomechanical Loading, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 224,
no. 5, pp. 435443, 2010.
123. D. Thuresson, Influence of Material Properties on Sliding Contact Braking Applications, Wear, vol. 257, no. 56,
pp. 451460, 2004.
124. J. Jergeus, Martensite Formation and Residual Stresses Around Railway Wheel Flats, Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs. Part C,
vol. 212, pp. 6979, 1998.
125. H. Blok, Les temperatures de surface dans des conditions de graissage sons extreme pression, Proceedings of the 2nd
World Petroleum Congress, Paris, France, vol. 3, pp. 471486, June 1937.
126. J. C. Jaeger, Moving sources of heat and the temperature at sliding contacts, Proc. R. Soc. NSW, vol. 76, pp. 203224,
1942.
127. J. R. Barber, Thermoelastic Displacement and Stresses Due to a Heat Source Moving Over the Surface of a Half Plane,
ASME J. Appl. Mech., vol. 51, pp. 636640, 1984.
128. K. Takazawa, Effects of Grinding Variables on Surface Structure of Hardened Steel, Bull. Jap. Soc. Grind Eng., vol. 6,
pp. 1419, 1966.
129. T. Kato and H. Fujii, Temperature Measurement of Workpiece in Surface Grinding by PVD Film Method, ASME J.
Manuf. Sci. Eng., vol. 119, pp. 689694, 1997.
130. X. Xu and S. Malkin, Comparison of Methods to Measure Grinding Temperatures, ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., vol. 123,
pp. 191195, 2001.
131. J. Wen and M. M. Khonsari, Analytical Formulation for the Temperature Profile by Duhamels Theorem in Bodies
Subjected to an Oscillatory Heat Source, ASME J. Heat Transf., vol. 129, pp. 236240, 2007.
132. J. F. Archard, The Temperature of Rubbing Surfaces, Wear, vol. 2, no. 6, pp. 438455, 1959.
133. U. C. Paek and F. Gagliano, Thermal Analysis of Laser Drilling Processes, IEEE J. Quantum Electron., vol. 8,
pp. 112119, 1972.
134. T. W. Eagar and N. S. Tsai, Temperature Fields Produced by Traveling Distributed Heat Sources, Weld. Res. Suppl.,
vol. 62, pp. 346355, 1983.
135. Y. Terauchi, H. Nadano, and M. Kohno, On the Temperature Rise Caused by Moving Heat Sources. II: Calculation
of Temperature Considering Heat Radiation From Surface, Bull. JSME, vol. 28, pp. 27892795, 1985.
136. O. Manca, B. Morrone, and V. Naso, Quasi-steady-state Three Dimensional Temperature Distribution Induced by a
Moving Circular Gaussian Heat Source in a Finite Depth Solid, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 38, pp. 13051315, 1995.
137. A. A. Yevtushenko, E. G. Ivanyk, and O. M. Ukhanska, Transient Temperature of Local Moving Areas of Sliding
Contact, Tribol. Int., vol. 30, pp. 209214, 1997.
138. H. Kaebernick, D. Bicleanu, and M. Brandt, Theoretical and Experimental Investigation of Pulsed Laser Cutting,
CIRP Ann., vol. 48, pp. 163166, 1999.
139. Z. Neder, K. Varadi, L. Man, and K. Friedrich, Numerical and Finite Element Contact Temperature Analysis of Steel-
bronze Real Surfaces in Dry Sliding Contact, Tribol. Trans., vol. 42, pp. 453462, 1999.
140. A. Bari, Analytical Model for Thermal Resistance Due to Multiple Moving Circular Contacts on a Coated Body, C.
R. Mec., vol. 331, pp. 557562, 2003.
141. J. F. Li, L. Li, and F. H. Stott, Comparison of Volumetric and Surface Heating Sources in the Modeling of Laser Melting
of Ceramic Materials, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf., vol. 47, pp. 11591174, 2004.
142. N. Bianco, O. Manca, S. Nardini, and S. Tamburrino, Transient Heat Conduction in Solids Irradiated by a Moving
Heat Source, Proceedings of COMSOL Users Conference, Milano, Italy, November 2006.
143. P. Levin, A General Solution of 3-D Quasi-Steady-State Problem of a Moving Heat Source on a Semi-Infinite Solid,
Mech. Res. Commun., vol. 35, pp. 151157, 2008.
144. H. A. Francis, Interfacial Temperature Distribution Within a Sliding Hertzian Contact, ASLE Trans., vol. 14,
pp. 4154, 1971.
145. X. Tian and F. E. Kennedy, Maximum and Average Flash Temperatures in Sliding Contacts, J. Tribol., vol. 116, no. 1.
pp. 167173, 1994.
146. W. L. Kuo and J. F. Lin, General Temperature Rise Solution for a Moving Plane Heat Source Problem in Surface
Grinding, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., vol. 31, pp. 268277, 2006.
147. R. Komanduri and Z. B. Hou, Analysis of Heat Partition and Temperature Distribution in Sliding Systems, Wear, vol.
251, no. 112, pp. 925938, 2001.
148. X. Tian and F. E. Kennedy, Contact Surface Temperature Models for Finite Bodies in Dry and Boundary Lubricated
Sliding, Trans. ASME J. Tribol., vol. 115, pp. 411418, 1993.
149. B. Vick and M. J. Furey, An Investigation into the Influence of Frictionally Generated Surface Temperatures on
Thermionic Emission, Wear, vol. 254, pp. 11551161, 2003.
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 27

150. H. Xu, W. W. Chen, K. Zhou, Y. Huang, and Q. J. Wang, Temperature Field Computation for a Rotating Cylindrical
Workpiece Under Laser Quenching, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., vol. 47, pp. 679686, 2010.
151. R. Weichert and K. Schonert, Temperature Distribution Produced by a Moving Heat Source, Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math.,
vol. 31, pp. 363379, 1978.
152. H. J. Zhang, Non-quasi-steady Analysis of Heat Conduction From a Moving Heat Source, ASME Trans. J. Heat Transf.,
vol. 112, pp. 777779, 1990.
153. Z. Zeng, J. M. B. Brown, and A. E. Vardy, On Moving Heat Sources, Heat Mass Transf., vol. 33, pp. 4149, 1997.
154. F. F. Ling, A Quasi-iterative Method for Computing Interfacce Temperature Distributions, Z. Angew. Math., vol. 10,
pp. 461474, 1959.
155. F. F. Ling and C. W. Ng, On Temperature at the Interfaces of Bodies in Sliding Contact, Proceedings of the 4th US
National Congress of Applied Mechanics ASME, New York, vol. 4, pp. 13431349, June 1962.
156. F. F. Ling and S. L. Pu, Probable Interface Temperatures of Solids in Sliding Contact, Wear, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 2334,
1964.
157. J. R. Barber, Distribution of Heat Between Sliding Surfaces, J. Mech. Eng. Sci., vol. 9, pp. 351354, 1967.
158. H. S. Cheng, Interfacial Temperature Distribution Within a Sliding Hertzian Contact, ASLE Trans, vol. 14, pp. 49,
1971.
159. A. Cameron, A. N. Gordon, and G. T. Symm, Contact Temperatures in Rolling/Sliding Surfaces, Proc. R. Soc. London
A, vol. 286, pp. 4561, 1965.
160. M. Ertz and K. Knothe, A Comparison of Analytical and Numerical Methods for the Calculation of Temperatures in
Wheel/Rail Contact, Wear, vol. 253, pp. 498508, 2002.
161. K. L. Johnson, Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, London, 1985.
162. M. Ertz and K. Knothe, Thermal Stresses and Shakedown in Wheel/Rail Contact, Arch. Appl. Mech., vol. 72, no. 10,
pp. 715729, 2003.
163. S. Liu and Q. Wang, Transient Thermoelastic Stress Fields in a Half-Space, J. Tribol., vol. 125, no. 1, p. 33, 2003.
164. S. Wang and K. Komvopoulos, A Fractal Theory of the Interfacial Temperature Distribution in the Slow Sliding
Regime: Part I-Elastic Contact and Heat Transfer Analysis, ASME J. Tribol., vol. 116, pp. 812823, 1994.
165. S. Wang and K. Komvopoulos, A Fractal Theory of the Interficial Temperature Distribution in the Slow Sliding
Regime: Part II-multiple Domains, Elastoplastic Contacts and Applications, ASME J. Tribol., vol. 116, pp. 824832,
1994.
166. S. Wang and K. Komvopoulos, A Fractal Theory of the Temperature Distribution at Elastic Contacts of Fast Sliding
Surfaces, ASME J. Tribol., vol. 117, pp. 203215, 1995.
167. K. Komvopoulos, Effects of Multi-Scale Roughness and Frictional Heating on Solid Body Contact Deformation, C.
R. Mcanique, vol. 336, no. 12, pp. 149162, 2008.
168. S. Liu and Q. Wang, A Three-dimensional Thermomechanical Model of Contact between Non-conforming Rough
Surfaces, J. Tribol., vol. 123, no. 1, pp. 1726, 2001.
169. V. Boucly, D. Nelias, S. Liu, Q. J. Wang, and L. M. Keer, Contact Analyses for Bodies with Frictional Heating and
Plastic Behavior, J. Tribol., vol. 127, no. 2, pp. 355364, 2005.
170. W. W. Chen and Q. J. Wang, Thermomechanical Analysis of Elastoplastic Bodies in a Sliding Spherical Contact
and the Effects of Sliding Speed, Heat Partition, and Thermal Softening, J. Tribol., vol. 130, no. 4, pp. 041402:110,
2008.
171. M. Spiryagin, K. S. Lee, H. H. Yoo, O. Kashura, and S. Popov, Numerical Calculation of Temperature in the Wheelrail
Flange Contact and Implications for Lubricant Choice, Wear, vol. 268, no. 12, pp. 287293, 2010.
172. F. Kolonits, Analysis of the Temperature of the Rail/Wheel Contact Surface Using a Half-space Model and a Moving
Heat Source, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 230, no. 2, pp. 18, 2014.
173. V. Gupta, G. Hahn, P. Bastias, and C. Rubin, Calculations of the Frictional Heating of a Locomotive Wheel Attending
Rolling Plus Sliding, Wear, vol. 191, pp. 237241, 1996.
174. J. Sundh and U. Olofsson, Relating Contact Temperature and Wear Transitions in a WheelRail Contact, Wear,
vol. 271, no. 12, pp. 7885, 2011.
175. X. Shi, A. Wu, C. Jin, and S. Qu, Thermomechanical Modeling and Transient Analysis of Sliding Contacts between
an ElasticPlastic Asperity and a Rigid Isothermal Flat, Tribol. Int., vol. 81, pp. 5360, 2015.
176. M. R. K. Vakkalagadda, K. P. Vineesh, and V. Racherla, Estimation of Railway Wheel Running Temperatures Using a
Hybrid Approach, Wear, vol. 328329, pp. 537551, 2015.
177. K. J. Sawley, Calculation of Temperatures in a Sliding Wheel/Rail System and Implications for Wheel Steel Develop-
ment, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 221, no. 4, pp. 455465, 2007.
178. J. Sun, K. J. Sawley, and D. H. Stone, Progress in the Reduction of Wheel Spalling, 12th International Wheelset Congress,
Qingdao, China, vol. 12, pp. 1829, September 1998.
179. B. Gecim and W. O. Winer, Transient Temperatures in the Vicinity of an Asperity Contact, Trans.ASME J. Tribol,
vol. 107, pp. 333342, 1985.
180. J. Bos and H. Moes, Frictional Heating of Tribological Contacts, Trans. ASME J. Tribol., vol. 117, pp. 171177, 1995.
181. G. A. Berry and J. R. Barber, The Division of Frictional Heat-a Guide to the Nature of Sliding Contact, Trans. ASME
J. Tribol., vol. 106, pp. 405415, 1984.
28 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

182. A. Floquet, D. Play, and M. Godet, Surface Temperatures in Distributed ContactsApplication to Bearing Design,
Trans. ASME J. Lubric. Technol., vol. 99, pp. 277283, 1977.
183. B. T. Chao and K. J. Trigger, Temperature Distribution at the ChipTool Interface in Metal-cutting, Trans. ASME,
vol. 77, pp. 11071121, 1955.
184. R. Komanduri and Z. B. Hou, Thermal Analysis of Dry Sleeve BearingsA Comparison between Analytical,
Numerical (finite element) and Experimental Results, Tribol. Int., vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 145160, 2001.
185. F. E. Kennedy, Surface Temperature in Sliding SystemsA Finite Element Analysis, Trans. ASME J. Tribol., vol. 103,
pp. 9096, 1981.
186. J. Jergeus, Railway Wheel Flats, PhD Thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Goteborg, Sweden, 1998.
187. F. E. Kennedy, F. Colin, A. Floquet, and R. Glovsky, Improved Techniques for Finite Element Analysis of Sliding Sur-
face Temperature, in D. Dowson (Ed.), Dev. Numer. Exp. Methods Appl. to Tribol, Butterworth, London, pp. 138150,
1984.
188. C. C. Yu and J. C. Heinrich, Petrov-Galerkin Methods for the Time-dependent Convective Transport Equation, Int. J.
Numer. Methods Eng., vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 883901, 1986.
189. C. C. Yu and J. C. Heinrich, PetrovGalerkin Methods for Multidimensional, Time-dependent, Convective-diffusion
Equations, Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., vol. 24, pp. 22012215, 1987.
190. N. Laraqi, Velocity and Relative Contact Size Effects on the Thermal Constriction Resistance in Sliding Solids, ASME
J. Heat Transf., vol. 119, pp. 173177, 1997.
191. K. J. Sawley and J. A. Rosser, Tread Damage in Disc Braked Wheels, Proceedings of 9th International Wheelsets
Congress, Montreal, Canada, pp. 5.4.15.4.10, September 1988.
192. A. M. S. Asih, K. Ding, and A. Kapoor, Modelling the Effect of Steady State Wheel Temperature on Rail Wear, Tribol.
Lett., vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 239249, 2013.
193. K. E. Crowe and P. K. Raj, Analyses of Rail Chill Effect, Report No. DOT-VNTSC-FRA-96-8, US Department of
Transportation, Fedral Railroad Administration, 1998.
194. G. J. Moyar, G. F. Carpenter, and B. R. Rajkumar, Heat Transfer Experiments with Braked Railcar Wheels, ASME Pap.
WA/RT-I, vol. 86, 1986.
195. A. J. Opinsky and M. W. Joerms, Finite Element Stress Analysis of Three Edgewater 32 Inch Wheel Design. Report
no. LT-638, Association of American Railroads, Chicago Technical Center, 1986.
196. S. Teimourimanesh, R. Lunden, and T. Vernersson, Braking capacity of railway wheelsstate-of-the-art survey, 16th
International Wheelset Congress, IWC16, Cape Town (RSA), pp. A1A18, March 2010.
197. T. Vernersson and R. Lundn, Temperatures at Railway Tread Braking. Part 3: Wheel and Block Temperatures and
the Influence of Rail Chill, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 221, no. 4, pp. 443454, 2007.
198. O. Orringer, W. R. Paxton, D. E. Gray, and P. K. Raj, Residual Stress and Its Consequences on both Sides of the
Wheel-rail Interface, Wear, vol. 191, no. 12, pp. 2534, 1996.
199. D. Socie, Critical Plane Approaches for Multiaxial Fatigue Damage Assessment, ASTM Spec. Tech. Publ., vol. ASTM
STP 1191, pp. 736, 1993.
200. R. Lundn, Contact region fatigue of railway wheels under combined mechanical rolling pressure and thermal brake
loading, Wear, vol. 144, pp. 5770, 1991.
201. D. L. Mcdowell and G. J. Moyar, Effects of Non-Linear Kinematic Hardening on Plastic Deformation and Residual
Stresses in rollIng Line Contact, Wear, vol. 144, pp. 1937, 1991.
202. J. W. Ringsberg, F. J. Franklin, B. L. Josefson, A. Kapoor, and J. C. O. Nielsen, Fatigue Evaluation of Surface Coated
Railway Rails Using Shakedown Theory, Finite Element Calculations, and Lab and Field Trials, Int. J. Fatigue, vol. 27,
no. 6, pp. 680694, 2005.
203. A. R. S. Ponter, A. D. Hearle, and K. L. Johnson, Application of the Kinematical Shakedown Theorem to Rolling and
Sliding Point Contacts, J. Mech. Phys. Solids, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 339362, 1985.
204. A. Ekberg, E. Kabo, and H. Andersson, Predicting Rolling Contact Fatigue of Railway Wheels, 13th International
Wheelset Congress, Rome, Italy, pp. 17, September 2001.
205. A. Ekberg, E. Kabo, and H. Andersson, An Engineering Model for Prediction of Rolling Contact Fatigue of Railway
Wheels, Fatigue Fract. Eng. Mater. Struct., vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 899909, 2002.
206. Y. Jiang and H. Sehitoglu, A Model for Rolling Contact Failure, Wear, vol. 224, no. 1, pp. 3849, 1999.
207. S. H. Avner, Introduction to Physical Metallurgy, 2nd ed. India: Tata Mcgraw Hill Pub., 1997.
208. K. Handa, Y. Kimura, and Y. Mishima, Surface Cracks Initiation on Carbon Steel Railway Wheels Under Concurrent
Load of Continuous Rolling Contact and Cyclic Frictional Heat, Wear, vol. 268, no. 1, pp. 5058, 2010.
209. D. I. Fletcher, Numerical Simulation of Near Surface Rail Cracks Subject to Thermal Contact Stress, Wear, vol. 314,
no. 12, pp. 96103, 2014.
210. P. Pistorius and J. J. Marais, Thermal Fatigue of Steel Tyres on Urban Railway Systems, Int. J. Fatigue, vol. 17, no. 7,
pp. 471475, 1995.
211. F. D. Ju and J. H. Huang, Heat Checking in the Contact Zone of a Bearing Seal (a Two-Dimensional Model of a Single
Moving Asperity), Wear, vol. 79, pp. 107118, 1982.
 JOURNAL OF THERMAL STRESSES 29

212. I. M. Widiyarta, F. J. Franklin, and A. Kapoor, Modelling Thermal Effects in Ratcheting-Led Wear and Rolling Contact
Fatigue, Wear, vol. 265, no. 910, pp. 13251331, 2008.
213. M. Sebs, H. Chollet, J. Ayasse, and L. Chevalier, A Multi-Hertzian Contact Model Considering Plasticity, Wear,
vol. 314, no. 12, pp. 118124, 2014.
214. S. Soemantri, W. Puja, B. Budiwantoro, M. Parwata, and D. J. Schipper, Solution to Hertzian Contact Problem between
Wheel and Rail for Small Radius of Curvature, Journal of Solid Mechanics and Materials Engineering, vol. 4, no. 6.
pp. 669677, 2010.
215. A. Pieringer, W. Kropp, and D. J. Thompson, Investigation of the Dynamic Contact Filter Effect in Vertical Wheel/Rail
Interaction Using a 2D and a 3D Non-Hertzian Contact Model, Wear, vol. 271, no. 12, pp. 328338, 2011.
216. N. Laraqi, N. Alilat, J. M. G. de Maria, and A. Bari, Temperature and Division of Heat in a Pin-on-Disc Frictional
DeviceExact Analytical Solution, Wear, vol. 266, pp. 765770, 2009.
217. W. Yan and F. D. Fischer, Applicability of the Hertz Contact Theory to Rail-Wheel Contact Problems, Arch. Appl.
Mech., vol. 70, pp. 255268, 2000.
218. Z. Wen, L. Wu, W. Li, X. Jin, and M. Zhu, Three-Dimensional Elastic-Plastic Stress Analysis of Wheel-Rail Rolling
Contact, Wear, vol. 271, no. 12, pp. 426436, 2011.
219. M. Busquet, L. Baillet, C. Bordreuil, and Y. Berthier, 3D Finite Element Investigation on the Plastic Flows of
Rolling ContactsCorrelation with Railhead Microstructural Observations, Wear, vol. 258, no. 78, pp. 10711080,
2005.
220. Y. Liu, L. Liu, and S. Mahadevan, Analysis of Subsurface Crack Propagation Under Rolling Contact Loading in
Railroad Wheels Using FEM, Eng. Fract. Mech., vol. 74, pp. 26592674, 2007.
221. K. D. Van, M. H. Maitournam, Z. Moumni, and F. Roger, A Comprehensive Approach for Modeling Fatigue and
Fracture of Rails, Eng. Fract. Mech., vol. 76, no. 17, pp. 26262636, 2009.
222. K. D. Van, M. H. Maitournam, and B. Prasil, Elastoplastic Analysis of Repeated Moving Contact Application to
Railways Damage Phenomena, Wear, vol. 196, no. 12, pp. 7781, 1996.
223. J. W. Ringsberg, H. Bjarnehed, A. Johansson, and B. L. Josefson, Rolling Contact Fatigue of RailsFinite Element
Modelling of Residual Stresses, Strains and Crack Initiation, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit, vol. 214,
no. 1, pp. 719, 2000.
224. D. I. Fletcher, Thermal Contact Stress and Near Surface Rail Cracks, 9th International Conference on Contact
Mechanics and Wear of Rail/Wheel Systems, CM 2012, Chengdu, China, pp. 470479, August 2012.
225. S. Abbasi, S. Teimourimanesh, T. Vernersson, U. Sellgren, U. Olofsson, and R. Lundn, Temperature and Ther-
moelastic Instability at Tread Braking Using Cast Iron Friction Material, Wear, vol. 314, no. 12, pp. 171180,
2014.
226. K. Knothe, R. Wille, and B. W. Zastrau, Advanced Contact Mechanics- Road and Rail, Vehicle Syst. Dyn., vol. 35,
no. 45, pp. 361407, 2001.
227. K. Handa and F. Morimoto, Influence of Wheel/Rail Tangential Traction Force on Thermal Cracking of Railway
Wheels, Wear, vol. 289, pp. 112118, 2012.
228. A. Ekberg and P. Sotkovszki, Anisotropy and Rolling Contact Fatigue of Railway Wheels, Int. J. Fatigue, vol. 23, no. 1,
pp. 2943, 2001.
229. U. Zerbst, K. Mdler, and H. Hintze, Fracture Mechanics in Railway Applications-An Overview, Eng. Fract. Mech.,
vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 163194, 2005.
230. D. I. Fletcher, L. Smith, and A. Kapoor, Rail Rolling Contact Fatigue Dependence on Friction, Predicted Using
Fracture Mechanics with a Three-Dimensional Boundary Element Model, Eng. Fract. Mech., vol. 76, no. 17,
pp. 26122625, 2009.
231. D. I. Fletcher, L. Smith, and A. Kapoor, Rail Rolling Contact Fatigue Dependence on Friction, Predicted Using
Fracture Mechanics with a Three-Dimensional Boundary Element Model, Eng. Fract. Mech., vol. 76, pp. 26122625,
2009.
232. M. Madia, S. Beretta, M. Schdel, U. Zerbst, M. Luke, and I. Varfolomeev, Stress Intensity Factor Solutions for Cracks
in Railway Axles, Eng. Fract. Mech., vol. 78, no. 5, pp. 764792, 2011.
233. D. Peng, R. Jones, T. Constable, S. N. Lingamanaik, and B. K. Chen, The Tool for Assessing the Damage Tolerance of
Railway Wheel Under Service Conditions, Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech., vol. 57, no. 1, pp. 113, 2012.
234. G. Fajdiga and M. Sraml, Fatigue Crack Initiation and Propagation Under Cyclic Contact Loading, Eng. Fract. Mech.,
vol. 76, no. 9, pp. 13201335, 2009.
235. A. Martn Meizoso and J. Gil Sevillano, Life Prediction of Thermally Cracked Railway Wheels: Growth Estimation
of Cracks with Arbitrary Shape, Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech., vol. 9, no. 2. pp. 123139, 1988.
236. A. Ekberg, E. Kabo, J. C. O. Nielsen, and R. Lundn, Subsurface Initiated Rolling Contact Fatigue of Railway Wheels
as Generated by Rail Corrugation, Int. J. Solids Struct., vol. 44, no. 24, pp. 79757987, 2007.
237. V. Monfared, A New Analytical Formulation for Contact Stress and Prediction of Crack Propagation Path in
Rolling Bodies and Comparing with Finite Element Model (FEM) Results Statically, Int. J. Phys. Sci., vol. 6, no. 15,
pp. 35893594, 2011.
30 J. P. SRIVASTAVA ET AL.

238. J. Brouzoulis and M. Ekh, Crack Propagation in Rails Under Rolling Contact Fatigue Loading Conditions Based on
Material Forces, Int. J. Fatigue, vol. 45, pp. 98105, 2012.
239. H. Desimone and S. Beretta, Mechanisms of Mixed Mode Fatigue Crack Propagation at Rail Butt-Welds, Int. J. Fatigue,
vol. 28, no. 56, pp. 635642, 2006.
240. D. Peng and R. Jones, The Development of Combination Mechanical Contact and Thermal Braking Loads for Railway
Wheel Fatigue Analysis, Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 1014, 2012.